Procedural lapses in government functions do not constitute criminal misconduct under the Prevention of Corruption Act without demonstrating direct financial harm.

O R D E R

Dated this the 16^th day of February, 2026

The second accused in C.C. No. 13/2023 on the files of the Court of the Enquiry Commissioner and Special Judge, Kozhikode has filed this Crl. M.C., and the prayer is as under:-

“In the above circumstances, it is most humbly prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to Quash the Final Report in Crime No. VC 18/2016/KKD of VACB, Kozhikode Unit, now pending as C.C. No. 13 of 2023, on the files of the Enquiry Commissioner and Special Judge (Vigilance), Kozhikode, insofar as it relates to the petitioner/2^nd accused.”

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Public Prosecutor, in detail. Perused the prosecution records as well as the records produced by the petitioner.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner pointed out that, as per Annexure A2 order, in Crl.M.C.Nos. 1244 of 2025 and 2859 of 2025, dated 12.09.2025, this Court quashed the case against the accused Nos. 3 and 4, who were the petitioners therein. It is also submitted that for the same reasons, the second accused, who held the post of the Secretary of the Grama Panchayat from 30.07.2014 to 05.08.2015 is also entitled for quashment as prayed for.

4. The learned Public Prosecutor did not seriously oppose the application in view of Annexure A2 order.

5. As per Annexure A2 order, this Court quashed the case against accused Nos. 3 and 4 and the relevant paragraphs 5 to 20 reads as under:-

“5. The prosecution case is that, 1^st accused, who served as the secretary of Farook Grama Panchayat from 22.08.2011 to 03.07.2013 and the 2^nd accused, who held the same position from 30.07.2014 to 05.08.2015, and the 3^rd accused who was serving as the Assistant Engineer in the said Grama Panchayath from December, 2011 to October, 2012, along with the 4^th accused, who was the Managing Director of Irshad Charitable Society, have conspired together to build a nursing college without proper building permit and accused 1 and 3, without any public interest and without complying the legal procedures, violated the building rules and the 3^rd accused has recommended the construction of the building without inspecting and examining the width of the road required as per the rules. Further allegation is that, the 1^st accused without proper inspection and contrary to the order of this Court to give provisional building number, have provided a permanent building number and the 3^rd accused has also not collected the required building Tax and caused wrongful loss to the government and wrongful gain to the 4^th respondent. On this premise, the prosecution alleges commission of offences punishable under Sections 13 (1)(d) read with 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 [hereinafter referred as ‘P.C. Act’ for short] as well as under Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code .

6. While canvasing quashment, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the 3^rd accused that, the 3^rd accused has been roped into this crime merely on the basis of the recommendation made by him, as could be seen from the report of the Building Inspector, form part of Annexure-A1, whereby he recommended construction as per the plan produced, after inspecting the plot with details of description and boundaries. It is pointed out by the learned counsel for the 3^rd accused further that, even thereafter, during the time of investigation, a joint site inspection was conducted by Sri.K.V. Abdul Malik, Town Planner, Kozhikode and Sri.Vijith Vijayan, Assistant Town Planner Office of the Town Planner, Kozhikode, in the presence of the Dy.S.P. (Vigilance) on 16.02.2018 and as per the said report also what was found is that, the as built measurements of th