IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA Cr.Revision No.180 of 2025 Date of Decision: 16.04.2026 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mahesh Kumar ...Petitioner Versus Central Bureau of Investigation …Respondents -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Coram:

The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge.

Whether approved for reporting?¹ Yes.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------- For the Petitioner: u Mr. Suneel Awasthi, Advocate.

For the Respoondent: Mr. Janesh Mahajan, Advocate.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral)

hInstant Criminal revision petition filed under Section g438 read with Section 442 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, (in short “BNSS”) lays challenge to order dated 26.03.2025 passed by learned Special Judge (CBI), Shimla, HP, in Cr.MP No.162-S/4 of 2025, whereby an application filed under Section 227 of Cr.P.C by the petitioner-accused (in short “accused”) for his discharge, came to be dismissed.

2. Precisely, the facts of the case, as emerge from the pleadings as well as other material adduced on record by the respective parties are that FIR No.RC0962019S0002 dated 07.05.2019 came to be registered against various persons

1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

including present petitioner under Sections 120-B, 409 & .471 of Indian Penal Code and Sections 13(1) (C), 13(1) (d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, at CBI, A.C.B., Shimla, District Shimla, Himachal Pradesh, on the precise allegation that ITFT Institute fraufdulently claimed sum of Rs.35,85,16,653/- under Central Government Sponsored Scheme for SC/ ST and OBC cattegories, belonging to the State of Himachal Pradesh in the name of students, who had already left the Institute during the period 2013-14 to 2017. The aforesaid amount was transferred to the bank account of ITFT Institute, which was operated by Major Gulshan Sharma and his son, who is also a Director in the Institute. Accused herein, who is a retired Air Force Officer, was also working as Admin and Accounts Officer at afore Institute. Since five demand letters sent to Department of H Education for amount indicated hereinabove were signed by the accused, he also came to be named in the FIR.

3. After presentation of the challan under Section 173 Cr.P.C in the competent Court of law, accused preferred an application under Section 227 Cr.P.C for his discharge (Annexure P-2) on the ground that as per terms of his appointment, he was just working as Admin and Accounts Officer and had no role in the admission process of any student or in the opening or closing of any student scholarship account. It has been averred in the application that though demand letters were signed .by the accused, but the same were done at the behest and under the directions of Managing Director of the ITFT Institute, who was otherwise solely competent to operate the bank account in which amount of scholarship was received. fIt has also been averred in the application that investigating agency has not placed on record any evidence to show thatt accused has illegally recovered any scholarship amounts, rather he performed his duties under the instructions of Managing Director, Gulshan Sharma.

4. While refuting the averments contained in the afore application filed at the behest of accused, respondent submitted before the learned Court below that five demand letters, pursuant to which amount was fraudulently received in the bank account of the ITFT Institute, were signed by the accused. It has been H submitted in the reply that accused, Mahesh Kumar falsely claimed scholarship through these demand letters in connivance with co- accused Gulshan Sharma, as such, he has been rightly booked under relevant provisions of law. The learned trial Court