C.B.I., U.P vs Indra Bhushan Singh & Ors

The facts

2. On 25th May, 1990 a learned Single Judge of the Allahabad High Court is said to have dealt with Writ Petition No. 5267 of 1990 (purportedly filed by Dr. Sheetal Nandwani) and passed an order to the effect that the competitive examinations scheduled to be held on 27th May, 1990 for admission in post-graduate medical courses in State medical colleges ought not to be held. Instead, admissions should be made on the basis of marks obtained by the candidates in the MBBS course as has been done in MDS courses. With this brief order the writ petition was allowed.

3. In compliance with the order dated 25th May, 1990 the State Government cancelled the scheduled competitive examinations in seven medical colleges in Uttar Pradesh and a direction issued to grant admission on the basis of MBBS results.

4. For reasons that are not relevant, the medical college in Meerut was not informed of the cancellation. Therefore, Dr. Rahul -Verma, like several others, participated in the examination held on 27th May, 1990. However, unlike others he filed Writ Petition No. 5548 of 1990 in the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court in which he sought and was granted, on 4th June, 1990 the same relief as Dr. Sheetal Nandwani on the basis of the order dated 25th May, 1990. He was represented in the case by his lawyer Indra Bhushan Singh. Dr. Rahul Verma is one of the respondents in Criminal Appeal No.877 of 2002 while Indra Bhushan Singh is the respondent in Criminal Appeal No.876 of 2002.

5. The order dated 25th May, 1990 was challenged in this Court and the result of the petition is reported as U.P. Junior Doctors’ Action Committee v. Dr. B. Sheetal Nandwani and Others.[1]

9. The complaint gives the background facts leading to its filing and goes on to state, inter alia, that after he had filed the writ petition, but before it was presented to the court, Dr. Rahul Verma substituted four pages in the writ petition as filed. In these pages, a reference is made to the purported order dated 25th May, 1990 and two of the pages were signed by Indra Bhushan Singh. During the hearing of the writ petition on 4th June, 1990 a photocopy of the purported order dated 25th May, 1990 was filed in court by Indra Bhushan Singh. On the basis of this writ petition with the interpolated or substituted pages and the purported order dated 25th May, 1990 filed during the course of hearing, a learned Single Judge of the Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench passed orders on 4th June, 1990 directing the State Government to act in accordance with the purported order dated 25th May, 1990. The complaint states, however, that the signature of Dr. Rahul Verma -on the vakalatnama filed along with the writ petition could not be confirmed. In the complaint, it was prayed that cognizance of offences committed by Dr. Rahul Verma and Indra Bhushan Singh under Section 120-B read with Sections 193, 196, and 420 of the IPC and Section 193 of the IPC be taken and the accused persons, that is, Dr. Rahul Verma and Indra Bhushan Singh be summoned to face trial for the offences said to have been committed by them.

13. Subsequent to the Magistrate taking cognizance of the complaint, Indra Bhushan Singh moved an application for being discharged from the prosecution of the case. Apart from contesting the matter on its merits, in the sense that no case was made out for proceeding with the complaint, one of the grounds taken by him was to the effect that the complaint was filed without due authorization. By an order dated 2nd April, 1999 the Magistrate rejected the application on merits, but did not advert to the issue regarding authorization (in favour of Kandpal) to file the complaint.

This led Indra Bhushan Singh to file Criminal Case No.1875 of 1999 in the Allahabad High Court and that was allowed by the order under appeal dated 4th February, 2000.

15. Following the order passed by the High Court, Dr. Rahul Verma also moved an application for being discharged from the prosecution and by an order dated 7th April, 2001 the Magistrate accepted the application and closed the case against him. The order -

As such, no record in relation thereto is available or existent.

20. Since the complaint by Kandpal was filed without any authority, in our opinion, the Magistrate could not have taken cognizance of it or proceeded with the matter. He lacked the jurisdiction to do so since there was no valid complaint before him.

22. Under these circumstances, in view of the categorical stand of the Allahabad High Court that no sanction or authorization was given to Kandpal to file a complaint against Dr. Rahul Verma or Indra Bhushan Singh, there is no merit in these appeals and they are accordingly dismissed.

……………………………………J (Ranjana Prakash Desai) ……………………………………J (Madan B. Lokur) New Delhi;

May 2, 2014