Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

Petitioner herein is the 7th accused in C.C.No.3 of 2020 arising from Crime No.3/2009/SIU-1 of VACB, SIU-I, Thiruvananthapuram for offences punishable under section 13(1)(d) r/w 13(2) and section 120B of the PC Act, 1988.

2. The crux of the prosecution allegation is that, 6 th accused is the owner of an old building, T.C.No.28/1830 in survey No.709 of Vanchiyoor Village in Thiruvananthapuram district. He proposed to renovate the above building. 7 th accused, who is a registered architect, was entrusted with the duty of preparing the plan and for obtaining license from the authorities. Accordingly, the architect prepared a plan for internal renovation of the existing building. The plan was submitted for approval by 6th accused. By order in No.TP7/BA/662/06, plan was approved and license was granted for carrying out internal renovation. Prosecution alleged that, on the pretext of renovation, 6 th accused demolished the entire structure and constructed a new four storied building in its place. On getting information about the illegal construction, stop memo was issued by corporation. This resulted in other legal proceedings. Thereafter, 6th accused submitted a revised plan and applied for regularization of the alleged deviation on the basis of the renovation application prepared by 7th accused. Prosecution alleged that the real intention of the 6 th accused in obtaining a plan for internal renovation and getting permission for that, was for demolishing the entire building and to construct a new building in its place under that plan, fully knowing that, new construction was not permitted in that area. It was alleged that, it was done consequent to the conspiracy hatched by 6 th and 7th accused along with the first accused who was the Assistant Planning Officer of the Corporation, 2nd accused Town Planning Officer, 3rd accused Building Inspector, 4th accused UD Clerk and 5 th accused Building Inspector of the Town Planning Section who were public servants. It was alleged that, the accused, during the period 15.03.2006 to 27.11.2006 committed various irregularities pursuant to the conspiracy. Further allegation was that, accused Nos.1 to 5 had misused their official position as public servants to help the 6th accused. It was further alleged that, on the application submitted for license, 7 th accused had undertaken that, he will construct the building as per the approved plan and if there was any violation, it would be brought to the notice of the authorities. The specific allegation against the 7th accused was that the building was newly constructed under his supervision. Further, even though he knew that the new building was constructed in complete violation of the plan and license and that he was duty bound by the undertaking to inform the Corporation, he did not inform the Corporation about the above violation. Thereafter, he even submitted an application for regularization of the alleged deviation, fully knowing that it was not a renovation or a mere deviation from the plan and license. On the basis of the complaint received, crime was registered and investigation was carried out. Annexure-A final report was submitted before the court below.

22. Having considered these facts, I am satisfied that a successful prosecution of the petitioner on the basis of the above materials is not possible. Necessarily, proceedings against the petitioner alone is liable to be quashed.

In the result, Crl.M.C is allowed. All further proceedings in C.C.No.3 of 2020 arising from Crime No.3/2009/SIU-1 of VACB, SIU-I, Thiruvananthapuram against the petitioner will stand quashed.

Sd/-