IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.19010 of 2009 1. DR.PRAKASH CHANDRA VERMA ….. PETITIONER Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE VIGILANCE DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA ….. OPP. PARTIES WITH Cr.Misc. No.21066 of 2009 1. DR. RAN VIJAY KUMAR ….. PETITIONER Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE VIGILANCE …. OPP. PARTY ----------- 02 09.09.2009 Heard both sides. Both matters arise out of the same case being Special Case No. 24 of 2009, arising out of Pirbahore P.S. Case No. 120 of 2009, registered under Sections 13 (1) (d), 13 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and Section 463, 464, 465, 511 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code. Petitioner Dr. Prakash Chandra Verma, during the relevant time was functioning as Coordinator, B.B.A. Course, Patna College. Petitioner Dr. Ran Vijay Kumar, was the Course Director-cum-Professior-in-charge of the said course/ College. The course was started in the year, 2005. The approved intake of the students was 60. Five seats were earmarked for the wards of N.R.I. 2 Subsequently, it appears, different steps were taken and recommendations were made for enhancing the intake of students. It appears, the matter remained pending at different level. Subsequently, the Minister, Department of Human Resources, Government of Bihar, passed an order on 1.9.2008 (Annexure-7) at page 103 of Cr. Misc. No. 19010 of 2009. By this order, it was decided to start the additional sections of the B.B.A. course awaiting administrative formalities/ approval. The copy of the order was forwarded to the petitioner P.C. Verma, who was functioning as the Coordinator of the course. On the strength of the aforesaid communication, the petitioner P.C. Verma started with the admission process and thereafter admitted additional number of students in the course. The matter was subsequently taken up by the University. A fact finding committee appears to have been set up. The recommendation of the committee is on the record. It has been pointed out with reference to the recommendations, that without obtaining approval of the additional strength of the course, by the competent authority, the admissions were taken. While taking admission grave irregularities/ illegalities were found at the behest of 3 petitioner P.C. Verma. It was further found that the petitioner Dr. Ran Vijay Kumar, who was functioning as the Principal-in-charge of the College/Course ought to have been vigilant, but he too defaulted in due discharge of his duties. Further Clause-6 of its recommendations takes note of the fact that the authorities particularly that of the Patna University ought to have acted quickly and swiftly in evaluating the order of the Hon’ble Minister which, in fact, ignited the whole episode. Learned counsel appearing in support of Cr. Misc. No. 19010 of 2009, submits that a writ was filed by some of the students admitted on the additional seats, and were subsequently removed from the rolls. The writ court non suited the claim of the petitioners of the said case and an observation was made that the matter qualifies for investigation by appropriate Investigating Authority. Resultantly, the F.I.R. of the case has been lodged on 28.3.2009. Mr. Giri, Senior counsel, points out that the said order was appealed against by the petitioner. The L.P.A. Court under order dated 5.5.2009 (Annexure-10) disposed of the same with the following observations:- 4 “In view of aforesaid observation made by the writ court we are of the view that the writ court has only expressed its wish that the entire matter should be thoroughly investigated by the Cabinet (Vigilance) Department and should not be left midway only after canceling the illegal admissions. The apprehension of the appellant is that even prima facie observations may have adverse effect in course of investigation which may be taken up by the Cabinet (Vigilance) Department or any other police agency. In the Facts of the case and specially considering that the appellant was personally given no notice of the writ case, we clarify that if any investigation is undertaken by the Cabinet (Vigilance) Department or any other police agency in the matter at hand, such investigation shall be conducted fairly and impartially without being affected by the prima facie views and observations in the order and judgment under appeal. This appeal is disposed of.” It appears, the petitioner Dr. Ran Vijay Kumar, also filed appeal against the said order, which was also disposed of in somewhat identical manner by the writ-appeal court under order dated 9.7.2009. It is contended by both the counsels appearing in support of these applications, that they have already been removed from their respective posts. It is next contended that the students who were admitted against the additional 5 seats have also been removed. Both the counsels strenuously argued before this Court that the illegalities/ irregularities, if any, committed by them may justify initiation of departmental proceeding, but not a criminal prosecution. The order of the Hon’ble Minister, Human Resources Department is on record, which permitted the petitioners to proceed with the admission against the additional seats. Learned special P.P. appearing on behalf of the Vigilance Department, opposed the prayer. He drew attention of the Court to the findings recorded by the fact finding committee, which is part of the F.I. R. It is contended that the matter is still under investigation and the Investigating Authorities are yet to arrive at a conclusion based on the materials collected in course of investigation. It is next contended that the petitioners are avoiding their appearance before Investigating Authority which is causing difficulty in investigating the case in proper and effective manner. According to him, presence of the petitioners before the Investigating Authorities is necessary in order to investigate and verify the deep rooted conspiracy in adopting a procedure of admission which was ex facie illegal and/or 6 arbitrary. Having considered the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties, this Court is of the view, that the petitioners must be given protection during the pendency of the investigation, so that the investigation may proceed in a proper manner with the assistance of the petitioners. Let both the petitioners surrender in the court below within four weeks from today and on their surrendering they shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Special Judge, Vigilance-1, Patna in connection with Pirbahore P.S. Case No. 120 of 2009, Special Case No. 24 of 2009 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C. The petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Authority as and when called upon and render all assistance in the investigation. It is made clear that the relief granted to the petitioners, is confined only during the pendency of the investigation. No sooner charge-sheet/ Final Form is submitted in this case by the Investigating Agency the present order shall cease its force. 7 With this observation this application is accordingly disposed of. P.K. (K.K. Mandal, J.)