Court No. - 81
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 47401 of 2019 Applicant :- Babu Ram Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Atul Tej Kulshrestha,Vinay Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sanjay Kumar Yadav
Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.
Heard Sri Atul Tej Kulshrestha, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Gyan Prakash, Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Sanjay Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for CBI, B.A. Singh, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State and perused the record.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C has been moved with a prayer to quash the cognizance order dated 30.10.2019 passed by Special Judge, Prevention of Anti-Corruption Act, CBI, Ghaziabad in Special Case No. 10 of 2019 (CBI vs. Dr. Ram Gopal Verma and others) FIR No. RC0062016A0014, under section 120B R/W 409, 420, 471, 477A IPC and section 13 (2) R/W 13 (1) (d) P.C. Act, 1988, Police Station CBI/ACB/Lucknow and also a prayer is made to stay the proceedings in this case till the disposal of this application.
The matter relates to NRHM scam and the accused-applicant at the relevant time was Pharmacist in District Pratapgarh. In the charge-sheet evidence has come on record that the applicant had indulged in corrupt practices as he did not follow the procedure laid-down for purchase of medicines etc. and thereby he has caused loss to the State Exchequer to the tune of Rs.7,94,277/-.
It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant that the applicant is absolutely innocent and charge- sheet has been erroneously submitted against him.He has retired from service on 31.07.2013 No embezzlement was committed by him, therefore, charge-sheet needs to be quashed. Co- accused Anil Singh has been granted relief to the extent that if any application is moved by the applicant, the same would be disposed of in the light of direction of Hon'ble Supreme Court issued in Special Lave to Appeal (Criminal) No.833 of 2015 (Sanjay Awasthi vs. State of U.P. and others) copy of the order is at page 58-A.
Learned counsel for CBI has vehemently opposed the prayer for quashing the proceedings and he has drawn the attention of the Court to paragraph nos. 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 and 15 of the charge-sheet which contained the details of irregularities committed by the applicant which led to loss to the State exchequer to the tune of Rs.7,94,277/-.
After investigation, charge-sheet has been submitted by the Investigating Officer after having recorded statements of witnesses. The veracity of the statements of witnesses cannot be tested in proceedings u/s 482 Cr.P.C. From the evidence on record, it cannot be said that cognizable offence is made out against the accused-applicant.
From the perusal of material on record and looking into the facts of this case, at this stage, it cannot be said that no cognizable offence is made out against the applicant. All the submissions made at the Bar relates to the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court in proceedings u/s 482 Cr.P.C. At this stage only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in cases of R. P. Kapur vs. The State Of Punjab, AIR 1960 SC 866, State of Haryana and others Vs. Ch. Bhajan Lal and others, AIR 1992 SC 604 and State of Bihar and Anr. Vs. P.P. Sharma, AIR 1991 SC 1260 lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. and Ors. Vs. Md. Sharaful Haque and Ors., AIR 2005 SC 9. The disputed defense of the accused cannot be considered at this stage.
In view of the above facts, I do not find any ground to quash the proceedings. The application stands rejected.
However, in case any application is moved by the applicant, the same would be disposed of in the light of direction of Hon'ble Supreme Court issued in Special Leave to Appeal (Criminal) No.833 of 2015 (Sanjay Awasthi vs. State of U.P. and others).
Order Date :- 20.12.2019 AU