Criminal Misc. No. 48999-M of 2007 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH (1) Criminal Misc. No. 48999-M of 2007 (O&M) Date of Decision : 26.7.2011. Hargu Lal ...... Petitioner Versus State of Haryana ...... Respondent (2) Criminal Misc. No. M-13018 of 2009 (O&M) Date of Decision : 26.7.2011. Dhani Ram ...... Petitioner Versus State of Haryana ...... Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAWAB SINGH Present: Mr. J.S. Bedi, Advocate & Mr. Tapan Kumar, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. Satyavir Yadav, DAG, Haryana. NAWAB SINGH J.(ORAL) By filing these petitions, Hargu Lal, Junior Engineer and Dhani Ram Clerk/Accountant of Municipal Council, Bahadurgarh have sought quashing of first Information Report No.303 dated April 22nd, 1997 under Sections 409, 420, 467, 468 and 471/120-B of Indian Penal Code registered in Police Station City, Bahadurgarh, District Rohtak wherein report under Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was presented before the Court after 10 years. 2. Firstly, the facts. On November 17th, 1993 a complaint was received from the Superintendent of Police, Chief Minister, Flying Squad, Haryana to conduct an inquiry against Balwan Singh, Secretary, Municipal Council, Bahadurgarh. During investigation, statement of Balwan Singh was recorded and on his statement, present case was registered against the petitioners exonerating Balwan Singh. 3. Allegations against Hargu Lal as mentioned in the Criminal Misc. No. 48999-M of 2007 2 order (Annexure P-2) of Director, Local Bodies, Haryana, Chandigarh are as under:- “1. That on constructing 292' long street, he made payment of 442' in Bill No. 43/10/93 of Tara Chand Contractor. In Bill No.59/12/93 and Bill No. Nil dated 18.10.93 both the work of C.C. flooring carried out by contractor Tara Chand, the width was recorded as 3” in the measurement book, whereas on spot inspection the width was found as 1.97.” 2. That he prepared bills of Devinder Singh Contractor without registration in Voucher No.127 dated 14.9.91 and in Voucher No.47 for the work of laying 15% yellow bricks done by Contractor Amir Singh and thus the Parishad incurred a loss of Rs.2201.60. 3. That he showed 2 ½ thickness of cement- concrete flooring work carried out by Suresh Pinky Associates in Chhabildas street in the measurement book which was found at 1.52” on spot inspection on account of which the Parishad suffered a loss of 17152/- and Rs.6343.50 and the work carried out by Pinky Associate in bylanes of the Basti in respect of earth work 3466 yellow bricks were used. 4. That the work-in-progress of the C.C. flooring carried out by the Contractor Tara Chand was recorded in the measurement book at 2 ½ whereas during spot inspection it was actually found at 0.88” on account of which the Council has suffered a loss of Rs.21071.55. Similarly, the work done in the sub-lanes of Ward No.4 have been shown recorded in the measurement book at 2 ½” whereas during inspection it was actually found to be at 0.87” owing to which the Council has Criminal Misc. No. 48999-M of 2007 3 suffered a loss of Rs.17548.30. On 1.9.93 a receipt has been given of Rs.10/- for 9 jobs against which 11 jobs have been shown and the NRI amount has wrongly been reflected vide voucher No.237 dated 2/93. 5. That from the earnest money of Shri Amir Singh, a wrong report has been made by not recovering the hours and in the year 1992, payment has been made to someone else by wrongly showing Shri Pawan Kumar.” 4. Against Dhani Ram, allegations were that in the year 1992, a contract was given to Pawan Kumar to lay brick flooring after putting earth in Sant Colony, Ward No.6, Bahadurgarh but Dhani Ram got it done by some other contractor and the bill amounting to Rs.18,771/- was prepared which was not paid to Pawan Kumar and the second allegation was that to lay water supply Pipes in Ram Nagar Colony, contract was allotted to Pawan Kumar but he did not get the work executed as per his statement. 5. Learned counsel representing Hargu Lal has contended that a departmental inquiry was conducted by the State Government with regard to the same set of allegations as mentioned in the FIR and in that inquiry vide report (Annexure P-2), he was found innocent. For facilitation, the operative part of the inquiry report is reproduced as under:- “In this way, on the basis of the reply to the charge-sheet furnished by Shri Hargu Lal, Jr. Engineer on 17.5.99, a detailed inquiry was conducted through the Assistant Director of the Directorate. The Inquiry Officer submitted his inquiry report to the Directorate on 6.9.99. In the above inquiry report, all the five charges levelled against the employee were not proved. Hence, the employee is proved innocent. Accordingly, the charge-sheet u/S 7 against the employe is hereby dropped and I direct that his suspension period Criminal Misc. No. 48999-M of 2007 4 from 3.6.97 to 26.2.99 be treated as duty period, for all purposes.” 6. Learned counsel further contends that since Hargu Lal-petitioner was exonerated in the departmental inquiry conducted by the Government, it is obvious that no conviction would be possible in criminal proceedings and continuance of the criminal proceedings against him would be nothing but abuse of process of law. 7. In Nirmal Singh vs. State of Punjab 2001(3) RCR (Criminal) 228 FIR was registered against the Junior Engineers under sections 409, 420, 467 and 468 IPC. They were exonerated in the inquiries conducted by the Departmental Officers. In view of that, the FIR was quashed against them by this Court relying upon the judgment P.S. Rajya vs. State of Bihar, 1996(3) Recent CR 261 of the Hon'ble Supreme Court wherein it was observed as under:- “The short question that arises for our consideration in this appeal is whether the respondent is justified in pursuing the prosecution against the appellant under Section 5(2) read with Section 5(1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 notwithstanding the fact that on the identical charge, the appellant was exonerated in the departmental proceedings in the light of a report submitted by the Central Vigilance Commission and concurred by the Union Public Service Commission.” This question was answered in favour of the appellant. It was held as follows:- “At the outset we may point out that the learned counsel for the respondent could not accept the position that the standard of proof required to establish the guilt in a criminal case is far higher than the standard of proof required to establish the guilt in the departmental proceedings. He also accepted that in the present case, the charge in the departmental proceedings and in the criminal Criminal Misc. No. 48999-M of 2007 5 proceedings is one and the same. He did not dispute the findings rendered in the departmental proceedings and the ultimate result of it. On these premises, if we proceed further then there is no difficulty in accepting the case of the appellant. For if the charge which is identical could not be established in a departmental proceedings and in view of the admitted discrepancies in the reports submitted by the valuers one wonders what is there further to proceed against the appellant in criminal proceedings.” 8. Above being the factual and legal position, it would not be possible to convict the accused on the same set of allegations which were departmentally inquired into by the State Government and as such, continuance of the criminal proceedings against him would be nothing but abuse of process of law. 9. Coming now to the case of Dhani Ram, as noted above, there were two allegations against him. To prove that both the allegations were false, reliance has been placed on certificates (Annexures P-2 and P-3) issued by Haryana Kshetriya Gramin Bank, Bahadurgarh which proves that a cheque of Rs.18,771/- was issued by the Municipal Council in favour of Pawan Kumar who got it en- cashed on May 15th, 1992 and another cheque of Rs.7311/- was given to him by the Municipal Council which was presented by him through Dharamvir and the payment thereof was made to him. Pawan Kumar signed the back side of the cheque also. From this piece of evidence, it is clear that the amount in question was paid to Pawan Kumar by the Municipal Council, Bahadurgarh which he got deposited in the Bank and encashed the amount also. 10. In view of this overwhelming evidence, in considered opinion of this Court, it would not be possible for the prosecution to prove the charges levelled in the FIR against Dhani Ram. 11. For the reasons aforesaid, this Court accepts the petitions and quashes the FIR No.303 dated April 22th, 1997 under Criminal Misc. No. 48999-M of 2007 6 Sections 409, 420, 467, 468 and 471/120-B of Indian Penal Code registered in Police Station City, Bahadurgarh, District Rohtak and subsequent proceedings arising therefrom qua Hargu Lal and Dhani Ram-petitioners. 12. Decided accordingly. 26.7.2011 (NAWAB SINGH) SN JUDGE