Jharkhand High Court
Shiv Kumar Patwari vs The Union Of India Through Cbi --- --- ... on 6 April, 2018
Author: Aparesh Kumar Singh
Bench: Aparesh Kumar Singh
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. M.P. No. 915 of 2018
---
Shiv Kumar Patwari --- --- --- --- Petitioner
Versus
The Union of India through CBI --- --- Opp. Party
---
CORAM: The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh For the Petitioner: Mr. Vishnu Kr. Sharma, Advocate For the O.P. CBI: M/s Rajiv Sinha, ASGI, Raj Nandan Prasad, Niraj Kumar, Advocate
---
03/ 06.04.2018 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in order to remove defect nos. 9(ii) and 9(iii), a supplementary affidavit has been filed giving the case numbers with the date of orders mentioned in para-6 of the main petition to which those orders were annexed. Surviving defects have been cured. Rest of the defects relating to supply of typed copy of some of the pages have also been removed.
2. In view of the submission made, surviving defects appear to have been cured.
2. The present petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 05.03.2018 passed in R.C. Case No. 38(A)/1996 by the Learned Court of Special Judge-VII, CBI (AHD Scam), Ranchi, whereunder cognizance has been taken against him and he has been directed to appear and face trial in exercise of powers under section 319 of Criminal Procedure code.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that from the discussions made at para-(G) of the impugned order relating to the present petitioner, it would be apparent that the petitioner had himself deposed as prosecution witness no. 174 in support of the case set up by the CBI and that there are no findings that he had not abided by the terms of pardon granted to him in connection with R.C. Case No. 45(A)/1996, order dated 14.07.2003, R.C. Case No. 41(A)/1996 order dated 14.07.2003 and R.C. Case No. 64(A)/1996 order dated 04.052005. Learned Court has not recorded the findings to that effect, nor issued any show-cause to him as to why pardon granted to him be not cancelled in terms of section 308 of Criminal Procedure Code. In such circumstances, petitioner has been compelled to approach this court as subjecting him to trial may cause miscarriage of justice. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also referred to the case of another person Dipesh Chandak who had also been granted pardon in a number of fodder scam cases, has been arraigned as an accused by the same impugned order dated 05.03.2018. He submits that this Court by order dated 23.03.2018, has been pleased to stay the order taking cognizance in his case.
24. Learned counsel for the CBI submits that the order arraigning the prosecution witnesses and Investigating Officer of CBI have been challenged by the CBI also in Cr. M.P. No. 1032/2018. However, he submits that he would assist the Court on all available grounds of law and facts, as are borne out from the records in this case as well. Other Criminal Miscellaneous Petitions have been taken up by this Court earlier on 23.03.2018 and have been posted for 27.04.2018 as an unfixed case.
5. Having regard to the facts and circumstances noticed above, let this case be also tagged along with Cr. M.P. No. 974/2018 and Cr. M.P. No. 906/2018 and be posted on the same date as unfixed case.
6. In the meantime, operation of the impugned order dated 05.03.2018 passed in R.C. Case No. 38(A)/1996 by the Learned Special Judge-VII, CBI (AHD Scam), Ranchi arranging the petitioner as an accused, shall remain stayed.
(Aparesh Kumar Singh, J) Ranjeet/