Himachal Pradesh High Court
Vivek Paul vs State Of Himachal Pradesh on 3 November, 2020
Author: Jyotsna Rewal Dua
Bench: Jyotsna Rewal Dua
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Cr.MP(M) No.1846 of 2020
Decided on: 3rd November, 2020
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vivek Paul .....Petitioner
.
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh .....Respondent
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Coram
The Hon'ble Ms. Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge
Whether approved for reporting? 1
For the Petitioner: Mr. Anirudh Sharma, Advocate.
For the Respondent: Mr. Anil Jaswal, Additional Advocate
r General.
(Through Video Conference)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge (Oral)
This petition, preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, is in relation to FIR No.5 of 2020, dated 05.10.2020, registered under Sections 420, 468, 471 & 120B of the Indian Penal Code and Section 33 of the Himachal Pradesh Prevention of Specific Corrupt Practices Act, 1983 at Police Station SV&ACB Solan, District Solan.
Interim protection was granted to the petitioner vide order dated 14.10.2020.
1 Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order?
::: Downloaded on - 03/11/2020 20:20:37 :::HCHP 22. Heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the status report.
3. According to the status report:-
.
3(i). The FIR was registered on 05.10.2020 on the basis of a complaint filed by one Inspector Kamal Dutt Sharma, appending therewith an inquiry report dated 19.05.2016, conducted on the basis of a source report in relation to the matter in question.
3(ii). As per the inquiry report, the petitioner while working as Block Development Officer, Kunihar, ordered deployment of one Sh. Devender Kalia, Panchayat Secretary in the office of Development Block Kunihar on 26.04.2018 till further orders. However, the copy of order was not endorsed to the higher officers. Contrary to the actual position, the Block Development Office, Kunihar in an intimation dated 04.05.2020, sent to Zila Parishad, Solan, reflected deployment of said Sh. Devender Kalia in Gram Panchayat Dadhogi, whereas he was actually deputed in Development Block Kunihar.
3(iii). Inspection of Employees Attendance Register for the period April, 2018 to June, 2020 revealed that Sh. Devender Kalia had recorded his attendance in the registers towards the end in his own handwriting in a series ::: Downloaded on - 03/11/2020 20:20:37 :::HCHP 3 on one day. This was contrary to the mode and manner of marking the attendance by the other employees.
3(iv). Office Superintendents Satpal and Ramesh .
recorded their statements to the effect that Sh. Devender Kalia had marked his entire attendance on one day during second week of July, 2020 and further that he had never really worked on his seat during the period in question.
Thus, it was concluded that the said Sh.
Devender Kalia had marked his attendance for the period of April, 2018 to June, 2020 despite being absent all this while. Salary for 29 months was released in his favour without taking any work from him.
3(v). The petitioner, being Block Development Officer, Kunihar at that time, deliberately and knowingly aided the said Sh. Devender Kalia in incorporating and manipulating wrong entries in the attendance register and furnished incorrect information/record to the Vigilance Department.
On the basis of the inquiry, the instant FIR was registered.
4. Investigation was carried out. During investigations, the statements of concerned officers/officials were recorded. The relevant record of the concerned period was collected and it was found that Sh. Devender Kalia had ::: Downloaded on - 03/11/2020 20:20:37 :::HCHP 4 not performed any work in the office w.e.f. April, 2018 to August, 2020. The said Sh. Devender Kalia though remained absent from the office during the aforesaid period, .
however, he was paid and had received the entire salary for the period in question. No notice in respect of his absence from duty was given to him by the Department. No correspondence in this regard was ever made by the petitioner with the higher officers. According to the status report, it appears from the documents that deployment of said Sh. Devender Kalia in Kunihar had also been ordered in the back date with the aid of the petitioner.
5. The status report does not dispute the fact that pursuant to the interim protection granted to the petitioner vide order dated 14.10.2020, he joined the investigation on 15th and 26th October, 2020 and is co-operating with the Investigating Agency. As per status report, investigation is still going on. The allegations levelled against the petitioner are primarily in respect of deployment of one Sh. Devender Kalia, Panchayat Secretary, at Development Block Kunihar, his alleged unauthorized and continued absence from duty w.e.f. April, 2018 to August, 2020 and receipt of salary during the said period with aid of the petitioner. As per the status report, most of the documentary record has been ::: Downloaded on - 03/11/2020 20:20:37 :::HCHP 5 collected by the Investigating Agency. Considering the nature of accusations levelled against the petitioner, custodial interrogation of the petitioner, in the facts and .
circumstances of the case, is not going to achieve any significant object. No previous criminal history of the petitioner has been indicated in the status report. Petitioner is resident of Village Dabi, Post Office Thanadhar, Tehsil Kumarsain, District Shimla, therefore, his presence can be ensured during trial. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is still in service. Therefore, the instant bail petition is allowed and the interim protection granted to the petitioner vide order dated 14.10.2020 is made absolute subject to following conditions:-
(i). The petitioner shall join and cooperate the investigation of the case as and when called for by the Investigating Officer in accordance with law.
(ii). The petitioner shall not temper with the evidence or hamper the investigation in any manner whatsoever.
(iii). The petitioner will not leave India without prior permission of the Court.
(iv). The petitioner shall not make any inducement, threat or promise, directly or indirectly, to the Investigating Officer or any person acquainted with the facts of the case to ::: Downloaded on - 03/11/2020 20:20:37 :::HCHP 6 dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or any Police Officer.
(v). In case the petitioner is put to trial, then he shall attend the trial on every hearing, unless exempted in accordance with law.
.
(vi). Petitioner shall inform the Station House Officer of the concerned police station about his place of residence during bail and trial.
Any change in the same shall also be communicated within two weeks thereafter. Petitioner shall furnish details of his Aadhar Card, Telephone Number, E-mail, PAN Card, Bank Account Number, if any.
It is made clear that in case of violation of any of the terms & conditions of the bail, respondent-State shall be at liberty to move appropriate application for cancellation of the bail. It is also clarified that observations made above are only for the purpose of adjudication of instant bail petition and shall not be construed as an opinion on the merits of the matter. Learned Trial Court shall decide the matter without being influenced by any of the observations made hereinabove.
With the aforesaid observations, the present petition stands disposed of, so also the pending miscellaneous applications, if any.
Copy dasti.
Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge November 03, 2020 Mukesh ::: Downloaded on - 03/11/2020 20:20:37 :::HCHP