IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.45186 of 2008 MD.MOZAFFER HASSAN, SON OF LATE H.M. MUSA RESIDENT OF ROAD NO. 1D, 202, NEW PATLIPUTRA, P.S. PATLIPUTRA, DISTRICT PATNA. --- PETITIONER Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH VIGILANCE S.P. --- OPPOSITE PARTY For the petitioner :- Mr. Chitranjan Sinha, Sr. Advocate Mr. Md. Aslam Ansari, Advocate For the Vigilance :- Mr. C.M. Chourasia, Advocate ----------- 2 9.4.2010 Heard the parties. This application has been filed for quashing the order dated 10.8.2007, passed in Vigilance P.S. Case No. 12 of 2000 (special case no. 6/2002/3/2000) by the Special Judge, Vigilance, Patna by which cognizance has been taken under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 477(A), 109 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code and 13(2) read with 13(1) (4) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1982. In short the allegations against the petitioner who was the Registrar of the B.N. Mandal University between the period 1995 to 1998 is that he as a Registrar along with all other University staffs and the State Government authorities facilitated the holding of examination for the batch 1992-93 of B.Ed. examinations. The documents revealed that the State Government had given a temporary recognition for the year 1992-93 to the year 1993-96 which was confirmed by letter dated 12.6.1997 issued by the Deputy Secretary of the Education Department. The controller of the examination was directed to make an enquiry by the petitioner, and after the receipt of the recommendation of the enquiry, as well as after the receipt of the letter of the State Government granting permanent recognition to the 2 College, the petitioner allowed the College to deposit the remaining amount of Rs. 50,000/- in the University. The examination was held by the University which has become the subject matter of this criminal proceeding. It would be important to mention here that the petitioner also asked the College to bring a certificate of grant of recognition from the National Council for Teachers Education in the year 1997. Subsequent the N.C. T.E. had granted affiliation to the petitioner’s college for the year 1998. On the basis of the aforesaid allegations, it is said that the staff of the University, the authorities in the State Government are all responsible for allowing the students of the College in question to sit for their B.Ed. exams without any proper recognition from the State Government. It is not clear whether the State Government has cancelled the recognition subsequently granted. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the role of the petitioner is very limited. He being the Registrar of B.N. Mandal University merely acted recommendation of the State Government. It is submitted that the staff of the University and particularly the petitioner was in no way responsible for conniving with the State Government authorities for the purposes of grant of recognition. If at all there is connivance it could only be that the authorities of the State Government who were responsible for grant of recognition. The role of the University is very limited. It is only after the State Government grants the recognition then steps are taken by the University under the Act to grant affiliation. 3 However, all these aspects cannot be considered at the stage of taking cognizance. Accordingly the petitioner has the liberty to raise whatever points he thinks fit and proper at the appropriate stage. This application is dismissed. Sanjay (Sheema Ali Khan, J.)