IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.23967 of 2009 DR.RAN VIJAY KUMAR, SON OF LATE RAM CHANDRA SINGH, RESIDENT OF NAGESHWAR COLONY, P.S.- BUDHA COLONY, DISTRICT- PATNA. ----- PETITIONER Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE VIGILANCE, STATE OF BIHAR, PATNA. ----- OPPOSITE PARTY ----------- 2 21.8.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the counsel appearing on behalf of the Vigilance Department. The petitioner has challenged the First Information Report on the ground that it has been instituted on two grounds. Firstly, it is based on the report of the Fact Finding Committee and also the order of the writ Court. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the order of the writ Court has been modified by the order passed in the L.P.A. on 9.7.2009 as contained in annexure-1 of the supplementary affidavit and the recommendations made by the Fact Finding Committee. I may refer to paragraph 3 of the report of the Fact Finding Committee wherein it has been stated that “Since the principal happens to b e the over –all Incharge of all the courses, it was his duty to see that things are happening properly. Prof. D.N. Jha and Sri T.P. Singh informed the principal about various lapses in BBA admission, but he did not act promptly. He did not report the matter to PU authorities even. This only shows lack of his competence and casual approach towards administrative work. The committee feels that the Principal of Patna College be relieved of all his duties as the Director of vocational courses and that a senior teacher of the 2 college other than the principal be appointed the director of all self- financing courses running in the college.” The First Information Report has been instituted much before the order of the L.P.A. Therefore, it is not correct to take the stand at this stage that the First Information Report has been wrongly instituted and is not in accordance with the direction given by the writ Court or the L.P.A. Court. With respect to the second submission made on behalf of the petitioner, it is apparent that the Fact Finding Committee has not put any criminal liability on the petitioner but has merely termed him as a man who lacks competence. Learned counsel for the Vigilance Department submits that the matter is still pending enquiry and as such at this stage it cannot be said that the petitioner would eventually be made accused and the charge sheet would be submitted against him. I am only bringing to the notice of the Vigilance Department the observations made in the Fact Finding Committee which they should take into consideration as the entire report does not show that the petitioner was involved in taking admission, all it shows that the petitioner who was Incharge Principal should have been aware what was happening. It does not indicate that there was any conspiracy. There are other lecturers, professors or persons Incharge taking admission to the BBA course and there appears tobe no conspiracy between the petitioner and lecturers, professors, admission Incharge or persons who have been found responsible in the report of 3 the Fact Finding Committee with respect to taking admission of students. Having observed these facts, I leave it now open to the authorities of the Vigilance Department to examine the facts in light what has been observed. In the result this Court is not quashing the First Information Report at this stage as the investigation is still pending and no inference can be drawn on the basis of the fact that the investigation is pending. At this stage learned counsel for the petitioner expresses his apprehension that the Vigilance Department some time takes adverse view with respect to persons who come to the High Court against one order or the other of the Special Court. It is the right of a citizen to move the Court if he is aggrieved with any order passed by the lower Court or even on administrative order of any wing of the Government. Moving the Court does not mean that the persons have any prejudice or personal grudge towards the authorities. This application is disposed of with the aforesaid observations. Sanjay (Sheema Ali Khan, J.)