Court No. - 53
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 32317 of 2018 Applicant :- Venu Verma And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- P.K. Singh,Jai Bahadur Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble J.J. Munir,J.
This is an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking to quash the charge sheet dated 23.12.2017 as well as entire proceedings of Case no.1477 of 2018, State vs. Pradeep Verma and another (arising out of Case Crime no.273 of 2017), under Section 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, Police Station Kotwali, District Moradabad, pending in the court of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court no.4, Moradabad.
Heard Sri P.K. Singh, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Indrajeet Singh Yadav, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State.
The prosecution case in brief against the applicants nos.1 & 2 who are proprietors of the M/s. S.B. Motors and the M/s. Shri Bhagawati Industries respectively, is that they were granted on the basis of competitive tendering certain work-cum-supply contracts by the Nagar Nigam, Moradabad. The said work-cum-supply contracts were awarded utilizing grant made available under recommendations of the 13th and 14th Finance Commission. The applicants like others before execution of the contract were required to furnish by way of Security Fixed Deposit Receipts of certain value commensurate to the worth of the contract awarded to each of the applicants. The applicants did not execute their part of the contract agreed either by undertaking the work covenanted or ensuring supplies contracted to the Nagar Nigam leading to cancellation of their respective contracts. The FDRs furnished by way of security were then sought to be forfeited and through memoranda dated 13.03.2018 and 28.07.2016 issued by the Nagar Ayukt addressed to the Manager of INDUSIND Bank, Branch Bareilly were sought to be encashed/ liquidated with proceeds applied towards satisfaction of the security forfeited. In response the Bank vide their memorandum dated 04.09.2017 apprised the Nagar Nigam that each of the FDR furnished as security to the Nagar Nigam by the applicants was a forged and fabricated document and had not been issued by the InduSind Bank. Thus, alleging offences of cheating and manufacture of false documents including valuable security a First Information Report dated 16.09.2017 was lodged by the Zonal Sanitary Officer, Nagar Nigam, Moradabad registered as Case Crime no.273 of 2017, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, wherein after investigation the police have submitted a charge sheet dated 23.12.2017. It is the said charge sheet that is under challenge in the present application.
The submission of the learned counsel for the applicants is that it is the responsibility of the Accounts Department of the Nagar Nigam to have verified the genuineness of the FDRs. It is argued that the Investigating Officer without collecting substantial material against the applicants have submitted a charge sheet. It is in particular argued that the applicants did not themselves know that the FDRs were forged and they were betrayed by their employees who purchased the same from the Bank. The applicants never knew about the fact that the FDRs were fake and believed the same to be genuine securities. The applicants were cheated by their employees in connivance with Bank officials.
Sri P.K. Singh, learned counsel for the applicants has argued that the applicants themselves being victims of cheating by their employees, it would be an abuse of process to punish them for a wrong done by their employees of which they were blissfully ignorant. Doing so in the submission of the learned counsel for the applicants would be an abuse of process of court.
The learned A.G.A. has opposed the motion to admit this application to hearing and submits that the impugned charge sheet shows an ex facie brazen act of cheating and fabrication of a valuable security which the applicants have utilized to earn a public contract through a public tendering process. It is such a heinous offence where this Court ought not to interfere in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. as there is no abuse of process at all involved.
Having considered the submission advanced by the learned counsel on both sides and given a thoughtful consideration to the matter, this Court finds on a perusal of record that the offence indeed is a very heinous offence so far as the allegations and the prima facie material go. It is an offence involving public funds of a public body borne on the Government Exchequer. The applicants have secured work-cum-supply contracts and pledged as security forged documents. So far as the prosecution goes there is also material in the case diary to that effect. It cannot be said that it is a case where there is no material in the case diary to show that forged securities were put in by the applicants to secure the public contracts in question. The matter involves prima facie an economic offence, and, therefore, too has very serious dimensions to it.
This is not to say that the applicants are in any way guilty of the offence so far as the opinion of this Court is concerned. All that is said here is for the limited purpose of the applicants' challenge to proceedings pending against them under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The case of the parties, either of the prosecution or the defence would not at all be prejudiced or bolstered by any observation carried in this order.
This Court is of considered opinion that the impugned charge sheet cannot be interfered with in the present proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
This application fails and is accordingly dismissed.
Order Date :- 17.9.2018 Anoop/ Neeraj