The background relevant for present case may first be noted.W.P(Crl.) 586/2010 Page 1 of 16The Supreme Court, in writ petition No.13029/1985 (M.C. Mehta v. Union of India) vide order dated 16.12.1997 had directed that no fresh permit would be granted in respect of auto rickshaw (TSR), except by way of replacement of an existing working TSR with a new one.This was done with a view to reduce pollution levels in Delhi.Consequently, the Motor Licensing Officer (MLO), Burari issued a detailed order prescribing the procedure to be adopted for replacement of old TSRs with new ones.A dealer could sell one TSR against one LOI as issued by the transport authority.Holder of such LOI had the option of purchasing a TSR from any authorized dealer.There were three authorized dealers at that relevant time in Delhi.Dealers had no say in the issuance of W.P(Crl.) 586/2010 Page 2 of 16 LOI.Whenever a customer brought with him LOI, all that the dealer was supposed to do was to receive the amount of TSR and sell the same by delivering the respective TSR, while retaining a photocopy of LOI for the sake of his own records.For registration of such TSR with the transport authority, the purchaser was required to produce the dealers sale invoice, Form No.20, Form No.21, insurance of the vehicle and the permit.After scrutinizing and verifying all these documents, officials of the transport authority [the MLO (AR)] would register the vehicle.W.P(Crl.) 586/2010 Page 2 of 16On certain information received by officials of National Information Centre (for short NIC), investigation was carried out which revealed that 1157 auto rickshaws had multiple registration as on 17.06.1999 i.e. it was a case where two or more than two new TSRs were given permit against one old TSR permit.A vigilance team of the transport authority headed by their Deputy Director (Vig.) visited the Burari Transport Authority and were able to locate 150 such files just by physical search.It was also found that the files were grossly incomplete and were not containing the necessary documents.FIR No.34/99 dated 15.09.1999 was registered at the instance of ACB, Government of NCT of Delhi.A total of only approx.350 files could be located.The rest of the files which were supposed to be available at the office of MLO (AR) Burari, were incomplete and irregularities in registrations of several TSRs were clearly made out.It W.P(Crl.) 586/2010 Page 3 of 16 was found that files/documents were fabricated to justify the existence of additional old auto rickshaws, so as to cover up the said crime.W.P(Crl.) 586/2010 Page 3 of 16The investigation revealed 10 specific cases of multiple registration during the year 1998 & 1999 (details whereof are found in the charge sheet) where, inter alia, Shri Shyam Sunder Dandona, owner of Pal Auto Deals, Paharganj provided new TSR to the prospective buyers as sub-dealer and most of the time he only arranged the old TSR or its papers from the market and got the new TSR registered either themselves or through, mostly, Shri Ashok Khyrana, a tout working in the Transport Authority.Shri Shyam Sunder Dandona got finance approved for the prospective buyers through his nephew.Sanjeev Kumar Dandona, the petitioner herein, Director of M/s Dandona Finance Limited.Shri Sanjeev Dandona, the petitioner was found to have financed almost every TSR of the 10 specific cases investigated through M/s. Dandona Finance Ltd. The petitioner was found to have provided blank, incomplete Form-20 having his signature over the stamp of his firm Dandona Finance Ltd. which led to creation of false files.It was found that the petitioner had an arrangement with M/s PRJ Enterprises for issuance of fake sale certificate (Form-21), which showed his connivance with others for getting maximum benefit through financing the TSRs.The petitioner was found to have signed more than one Form-21 as W.P(Crl.) 586/2010 Page 4 of 16 financier in respect of the same auto rickshow, i.e. DL1RC 7959, which had been found in different files with same registration number.W.P(Crl.) 586/2010 Page 4 of 16Investigation revealed that Sh.Raj Kumar Jain owner of M/s. PRJ Enterprises, Dealer of Bajaj TSR in Delhi has given standing directions to his employees to issue Sale Certificate for new TSRs to the persons / employees sent by Sh.Shyam Sunder Dandona of M/s. Pal Auto Deals and Sh.Sanjeev Dandona of Dandona Finance Ltd. as per the details provided.Almost every file was having Sale Certificate with wrong details leading to formation of fake records.Invoices against purchase were not available for relevant TSR.More than one Form-21 (sale letter) in respect of same vehicle which have been located in different files bearing the same registration number (as part of cover-up operations).As the new permits were banned so in this way he helped himself to get more profits by selling more TSRs in connivance with his sub dealers / financiers.It was also found out that almost every recovered file had wrong/incomplete LOI (Letter of Intent) details, no pencil print of engine or chassis number.Even the copies of cancellation certificates, supposed to be issued to the concerned authorities, were still present in the TSR file.Various sale certificates in form 21 were having wrong details, TSR deposit slips were absent and so were the original TSR W.P(Crl.) 586/2010 Page 5 of 16 permits etc. in most of the TSR files.Most of the cases were, inter alia, done by M/s. Pal Auto Deals, M/s Dandona Finance Ltd. (the proprietary firm of the petitioner herein) and M/s PRJ Enterprises.It was evident that the MLO/Head Clerk/MVI had not maintained any parameters for issuance of such permits.The specific allegations against the petitioner herein, as contained in the charge sheet read as under: W.P(Crl.) 586/2010 Page 6 of 16W.P(Crl.) 586/2010 Page 6 of 16Sanjeev Dandona, Proprietor M/s Dandona Finance Ltd.and that in pursuance of the above criminal conspiracy documents were got forged and then used as genuine in order to justify issuance of new permit and registration certificates, although under the W.P(Crl.) 586/2010 Page 7 of 16 guidelines of Transport Deptt.no fresh permit/RC could be issued in place of one old auto rickshaw more than once and that too when auto rickshaw in question was road worthy and permit/RC holder was himself plying the same in the NCT of Delhi and all of you A-1 to A-8 thereby committed an offence punishable U/s.120-B r/w 420, 468, 471 IPC r/w sec 13(1)(d) of PC Act 1988 and within my cognizance.W.P(Crl.) 586/2010 Page 7 of 16Secondly, All of you misrepresented facts and/or acted in fraudulent manner by your acts of commission or omission (as mentioned in Annexure A), as a result of which Transport Authority of NCT of Delhi was cheated in the matter of issuing of Registration certificate and Permit in the name of various Auto Rickshaw Holders and all of you thereby committed an offence punishable U/s 420 IPC and within the cognizance of this court.And I hereby direct that you all to be tried by this court for the above said charges".PW25 Chander Bhan has stated that files, D-24, D-27, D-28, D-31, D- 34 and D-40 are totally fake files.Authority record shows that some new TSRs were replaced against the old TSRs.According to prosecution A-5 has put his signatures/stamp of company on form-20 showing hypothecation of TSR but with regard signatures of TSR owners.VIPIN SANGHI, J.The present writ petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner to seek quashing of the order of charge dated 04.09.2008 and the charge-framing order dated 17.10.2008 passed by Sh.V.K. Maheshwari, Special Judge, Delhi W.P(Crl.) 586/2010 Page 1 of 16 in C.C. No.54/2002 at RC7(A)/2000/DLI/CBI/ACB/ND.The petitioner is one of the co-accused and is allegedly involved in the issuance of more than one TSR permit against one old condemned TSR in violation of the prescribed rules.Trading in permits was also not allowed by the Supreme Court.As a result of the aforesaid direction, Secretary (STA) issued a detailed order dated 02.01.1998 to the concerned officials including Motor Licensing Officer (AR), Burari prescribing procedures for maintenance of accounts of cancellation/registration of TSRs, monthly statement of TSR registrations cancelled or renewed, and format for "Certificate of Cancellation of Registration".W.P(Crl.) 586/2010 Page 5 of 16With the aforesaid allegations, charge sheet dated 15.03.2000 was filed by the CBI:ACB:New Delhi before the competent court.By the impugned order dated 04.09.2008, the learned Special Judge, Delhi held that prima facie case for framing of charge for offence punishable under section 12B read with sections 420/468/471 IPC and offence defined under sections 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 is made out against all the accused.Vide order dated 17.10.2008, the Special Judge, Tis Hazari framed charges against, amongst other accused, the petitioner (accused no.5) herein.a) You affixed stamp of your firm alongwith your signatures on Form 20 which were not having any signature of TSR owners, with a notice to create fake TSR files showing vehicle hypothecation.b) You put your signature alongwith seal of your firm in Form 20 of the files D28, 29, 30, 31, 35, 36 and 37 showing hypothecation of the TSRs in question when the signatures of Madan Lal, Ashok Kumar, Gauri Shanker and Bakshish Singh were not available on the concerned papers and hypothecation papers were certified on papers having forged signatures of Madan Lal, Ashok Kumar, Gauri Shanker and Bakshish Singh.(c) You arranged fake sale certificate for creation of false documents for supporting claim for new TSR in place of old."The charges framed qua all the accused reads as follows:"Firstly, that during the year 1998-99 you A-1 Raghukant Bhardwaj, MLO Transport Depta., A-2 Chander Pal Singh, Head Clerk, Transport Dept., Govt. of NCT, A-3 Anoop Singh Dahiya, Motor Vehicle Inspector., Transport Dept. Govt. of NCT, while posted and working as public servants entered into a criminal conspiracy with A-4 Shyam Sunder Dandona, A-5 Sanjeev Kumar Dandona, A-6 Ashok Kumar Khurana, A-7 Raj Kumar Jain and A-8 Arun Kumar Maggo @ Kaloo with an object to cheat the Transport Deptt.Of GNCT of Delhi in the matter of issuing new permits and registration certificates under the Replacement Scheme of the Transport Deptt.in lieu of old Auto Rickshaws either by falsely showing deposit of old Auto Rickshaws (when in fact no such old auto rickshaw was deposited) or by repeatedly issuing, more than once, new permit and RC in lieu of one and the same old auto rickshaw, in violation of the guidelines issued by the Transport Deptt.His arrangement with M/S PRJ Enterprises for fake sale certificate (Form-21) shows his connivance with others.He had signed more than one form-20 as financer, in respect of same auto rickshaw.Auto rickshaw having regd No.DL-IRC-7939 had been found in two files with the same regd number.PW56 Kirpal Singh W.P(Crl.) 586/2010 Page 12 of 16 and PW 57 Vijit Lal Mathur have stated that they had signed Form-20 (Sales Certificate of New TSR) brought and filed by A-4 and A-5 according to the standing instructions of their employer A-8."W.P(Crl.) 586/2010 Page 12 of 16The petitioner has been charged with conspiracy with the other accused in the commission of the offence.

Cited provisions: Section 420 in The Indian Penal Code; Section 471 in The Indian Penal Code; Section 468 in The Indian Penal Code