Court No. - 71
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 8188 of 2019 Applicant :- Manzoor Ahmad @ Manzoor Ahmad Ansari Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Bhawesh Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
Heard Sri Rahul Sahai, Bhawesh Pratap Singh and Sri Ashish Kumar Srivastava, learned counsels for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the charge-sheet dated 24.01.2018 and cognizance order dated 06.04.2018 as well as the entire proceedings in S.T. No. 263 of 2018, arising out of Case Crime No. 402 of 2014, under Sections- 13(1)(e) read with 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Police Station- Ghosi, District- Mau, pending in the court of Special Judge, (Prevention of Corruption Act), Court No. 5, Gorakhpur.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that earlier the applicant approached this Court by way an application being Misc. Bench No. 1436 of 2017, wherein the following orders were passed:-
"1. The petition seeks issuance of a writ in the nature of Certiorari quashing First Information Report dated 26-05-2014 bearing Case Crime No. 402 of 2014, under section 13 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Police Station-Kotwali Ghosi, District-Mau, transferred to Anti Corruption Organization, U.P., Lucknow.
2. Order dated 29th March, 2017, notices gist of the issue raised by the petitioner. The order reads as under :-
"1. The case set up by the petitioner is that he constructed a house in 1998-99. In the course of investigation, relevant parameters were required to be applied to evaluate the value of the house so as to see whether assests of the petitioner were beyond known sources of income. It has been asserted repeatedly in the petition that the parameters of value of the year 2012 are being applied which would indicate unfair investigation
2. Director General, Anti Corruption Organization, U.P. Lucknow is hereby directed to ensure that investigation is also conducted in regard to the above noted issue also.
3. Let an affidavit be filed.
4. Till the next date of listing, report be not filed. Investigation however, may go on.
5. List on 9.5.2017."
3. Short Counter Affidavit has been filed by Sri Sunder Singh Solanki, posted as Inspector(Task Force) Anti Corruption Organisation, Lucknow, with the plea that the investigation has been conducted in context of above extracted order.
4. The deponent has placed reliance on document dated 26th July, 2000, to say that parameters of years 1998 to 2000 have been applied for assessing value of the house of the petitioner.
5. Sri A.P.Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, has pointed out that memo dated 26th July, 2000, reflects parameters of year 2000 and therefore, the guidelines would be dehors the controversy. Sri Singh has also pointed out that earlier parameters of year 2012, were applied. The value of the house was assessed at Rs. 15 lakhs and odd. The income allegedly was found disproportionate to the known source of income by Rs. 6 lakhs and odd.
6. It has been pointed out that parameters of year 2000 have been applied, as projected in the Short Counter Affidavit. The house has been valued at Rs. 12,82,789/- The extent of disproportionate assets has been found to be Rs. 7,48,002/-
7. Considering the abovenoted figures, Sri Faisal Ahmad Khan, learned counsel for the State, has not been able to explain as to under what circumstances, the disproportionate income has increased while value of the house has decreased on the parameters of year 2000.
8. Allegedly, the construction of the house was started in the year 1997 and concluded in the year 1998. Under the circumstances, parameters for the relevant period were required to be employed for assessment of value of the house.
9. From the above it is evident that fair and effective investigation is not being conducted.
10. For the reasons recorded above, we are hereby ordering further investigation.
11. We are prima-facie convinced that the investigation at the level of Inspector is not proper. We do not want to comment any further.
12. We hereby direct Director General of Police, Anti Corruption Organisation, Lucknow to entrust further investigation with an officer not below the rank of Circle Officer.
13. Director General of Police, Anti Corruption Organisation, Lucknow, is directed to supervise the investigation and file his affidavit on or before the next date of listing on the basis of evidence collected till that date.
14. List on 28th July, 2017.
15. Till the next date of listing, the petitioner shall not be taken in custody.
16. Let a copy of this order be conveyed to Director General of Police, Anti Corruption, Bureau, Lucknow, for compliance of this order."
In pursuance of the aforesaid order, further investigation has been conducted by the Investigating Officer and charge-sheet has been submitted, whereon cognizance has been taken without application of mind. It has been submitted that the prosecution has not been able to take a clear stand regarding the amount of disproportionate assets and inconsistent stand is still being taken.
In that view of the matter, the applicant is permitted to move discharge application through counsel before the trial court within one month from today and the trial court shall decide the same within a period of two months from the date of filing of such application alongwith certified copy of this order. Applicant shall furnish personal bond as per Section 88 Cr.P.C before the Court below ensuring his presence before the Court for the purpose of consideration of discharge application. In case of failure to appear before the Court after execution of bond proceedings under Section 229-A I.P.C shall be initiated against him.
Till the discharge application is decided, no coercive measures shall be taken against the applicants.
With the aforesaid observations, this application is disposed of.
Order Date :- 28.2.2019 Ruchi Agrahari