M/S Hcl Infosystem Ltd vs Central Bureau Of Investigation

3. The Central Bureau of Investigation (the “CBI”) conducted investigation in what is known as “National Rural Health Mission Scam” (“NHRM Scam”). According to the said investigation, NRHM funds to the tune of Rs. 9,000 crores, which were allocated to the State of Uttar Pradesh for the period 2005-2006 by the Ministry of Health & Family Welfare, Government of India, were diverted and allegedly misappropriated on a large scale. The CBI enquiry was ordered by the Lucknow Bench of the High Court on 15th November, 2011. It also came to light that two Chief Medical Officers were shot dead as a result of the said scam. One Deputy Chief Medical Officer was arrested by the local police, but he was found dead in jail on 22nd June, 2011. One Sunil Verma, who was named as one of the accused, allegedly committed suicide on 23rd January, 2012. One Mahender Kumar Sharma, who was a clerk in the office of Chief Medical Officer, Lakhimpur Kheri was found murdered on 15th February, 2012. The CBI conducted searches of more than 150 places across the State and arrested a number of accused persons suspected to be involved in the embezzlement of NHRM funds.

31. In the present case there is nothing on the record to suggest that the Petitioners will not get fair trial and may face miscarriage of justice. In absence of any such threat & miscarriage of justice, no interference is called for against the impugned order taking cognizance of the offence against the Petitioners.

In the light of the above, a ministerial omission either by the registry of the High Court or by the State Government will not dissolve the conferment of authority on the successor in office.

In the instant case, since no PC offence has been committed by any of the non-public servants and no charges have been framed against the public servant, while he was alive, the Special Judge had no occasion to try any case against any of them under the PC Act, since no charge has been framed prior to the death of the public servant. The jurisdictional fact, as already discussed above, does not exist so far as this appeal is concerned, so as to exercise jurisdiction by the Special Judge to deal with non-PC offences.

47. Consequently, we find no error in the view taken by the Special Judge, CBI, Greater Mumbai in forwarding the case papers of Special Case No.88 of 2001 in the Court of the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate for trying the case in accordance with law. Consequently, the order passed by the High Court is set aside. The competent court to which Special Case No.88 of 2001 is forwarded, is directed to dispose of the same within a period of six months. Criminal Appeal No. 161 of 2011 is allowed accordingly.”

16. In view of above distinguishing feature in the present case from the case of Jitender Kumar Singh (supra), we do not find any merit in these appeals and the same are dismissed.

August 09 , 2016.

(@ Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 4338/2015) M/S HCL INFOSYSTEM LTD Appellant(s) VERSUS CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION Respondent(s) WITH CRL.A. No.752/2016 (@ SLP(Crl) No. 1418/2016) Date : 09/08/2016 These appeals were called on for pronouncement of JUDGMENT today.

For Petitioner(s) Mr. P. V. Dinesh,Adv.

Mr. Sibo Sankar Mishra,Adv.

Mr. Uma Kant Mishra, Adv.

Mr. Niranjan Sahu, Adv.

For Respondent(s) Mr. M. Rambabu, Adv.

Mukesh Kumar Maroria,Adv.

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adarsh Kumar Goel pronounced the judgment of the Bench comprising Hon'ble Mr. Justice V. Gopala Gowda and His Lordship.

Leave granted.

The appeals are dismissed in terms of the signed Reportable Judgment.

(Signed Reportable judgment is placed on the file)