Punjab-Haryana High Court
M/S Jagroop Singh And Sandeep Kumar vs State Of Punjab And Others on 20 December, 2024
Author: Mahabir Singh Sindhu
Bench: Mahabir Singh Sindhu
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:171878
111
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-49136-2024 IN/AND
CRM-M-24089-2024 (O&M)
Date of decision: 20.12.2024
M/s Jagroop Singh and Sandeep Kumar through
its partner-Jagroop Singh ...Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab and others ...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHABIR SINGH SINDHU
Present: Mr. Vardaan, Advocate for
Mr. Prateek Gupta, Advocate for the applicant-petitioner.
Dr. D.S. Lamba, DAG, Punjab.
******
MAHABIR SINGH SINDHU, J.
CRM-49136-2024 Application under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for recalling the order dated 02.12.2024.
Notice of the application to non-applicant/respondents. At this stage, Mr. D.S. Lamba, learned DAG, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of non-applicant/respondents and has not raised serious objection to the prayer made by applicant/petitioner.
In view of the above and for the reasons mentioned in the application, same is allowed as prayed for subject to all just exceptions. With the consent of both parties, main case is taken up on Board today itself. Main case Present petition under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, (for short 'Cr.P.C.'), inter alia, for seeking quashing of FIR No. 11 dated 16.08.2022, registered under section 409, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120B of 1 of 9 ::: Downloaded on - 24-12-2024 21:25:40 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:171878 CRM-49136-2024 IN/AND -2- CRM-M-24089-2024 (O&M) Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short 'IPC') and Sections 7, 8, 12 & 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, as amended vide Amendment Act, 2018 (for short 'PC Act') at Police Station Vigilance Bureau, Ludhiana and all other consequential proceedings arising therefrom, qua the petitioner.
2. BRIEF FACTS:
2.1 It transpires that one Gurpreet Singh son of Shri Swaran Singh, resident of House No.218, Street No.4, Durgapuri Vistar, Police Station, Nandnagri, Delhi-110093 (now residing at Guru Teg Bahadur Nagar, District Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar, Punjab) submitted written complaint dated 02.03.2022 to Chief Director, Vigilance Bureau, Punjab, which was forwarded to Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vigilance Bureau, Ludhiana, resulting into registration of FIR No. 11 dated 16.08.2022 against petitioner and other co-
accused.
2.2 Primarily, allegations in the aforesaid FIR are that co-accused - Bharat Bhushan Sharma @ Ashu, being Minister of Food, Civil Supplies & Consumer Affairs, Government of Punjab made certain amendments while notifying "The Punjab Foodgrains Labour & Cartage Policy 2020-2021" (for short "the Policy for 2020-21").
It is further alleged that in the Policy for previous year i.e. 2019- 2020, there was no clause with regard to minimum turnover and every person was eligible to take part in the bidding process; however, in the year 2020-21, new sub-clause-G in clause 5 was inserted regarding "minimum turnover" from the cartage work of foodgrains of Govt. agencies in any one financial year out of previous 3 financial years i.e. from 2017-2018 to 2019-2020; hence the fresh participants were debarred being ineligible.
2 of 9
::: Downloaded on - 24-12-2024 21:25:41 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:171878
CRM-49136-2024 IN/AND -3-
CRM-M-24089-2024 (O&M)
It is also alleged that due to amendment in the Policy for 2020-21, the capacity of cluster was increased and as a result thereof, the competition was decreased. In this manner, it is alleged that contracts were allotted to some 'favorites' of co-accused-Bharat Bhushan Sharma @ Ashu, including the petitioner and bids of other contractors were rejected. Again alleged that huge loss was caused to the public exchequer by co-accused-Bharat Bhushan Sharma @ Ashu in connivance with petitioner and other accused while hatching criminal conspiracy, committing forgery, using forged documents as genuine and some of the government official(s) receiving kickbacks in return. CONTENTIONS
3. ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER 3.1 Learned counsel for petitioner contends that present case has been registered out of political vengeance on behalf of the ruling Government of Aam Aadmi Party in order to suppress the voice of co-accused-Bharat Bhushan Sharma @ Ashu, who is a former Minister of Food, Civil Supplies & Consumer Affairs of Punjab.
3.2 Further contends that as per the Policy for 2020-21, there was a Tender Allotment Committee for each district in the State of Punjab, headed by District Controller consisting of 07 members, who were responsible for conducting the e-auction and giving the tenders. At that time, although co- accused-Bharat Bhushan Sharma @ Ashu was Minister of Food, Civil Supplies & Consumer Affairs, Government of Punjab, but he was not the member of any of the District Tender Allotment Committees and as such, no decision regarding the allotment of tender was taken by him. Even for District Ludhiana, there was an independent District Tender Allotment Committee, headed by Mr. Manish Narula, Deputy Director as its Chairman. The approval for amendment in the 3 of 9 ::: Downloaded on - 24-12-2024 21:25:41 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:171878 CRM-49136-2024 IN/AND -4- CRM-M-24089-2024 (O&M) Policy for 2020-21 was accorded by respective District Tender Allotment Committees and thereafter, the matter was sent to the Department of Finance, Government of Punjab for its concurrence. On receipt of the consent from the Finance Department, the case was forwarded to the Cabinet for its approval, which was duly granted and thereafter the amendment in the Policy for 2020- 21 was carried out. Thus, it is wrong to allege that it is only co-accused-Bharat Bhushan Sharma @ Ashu, who being a Minister, had amended the Policy for 2020-21.
3.3 Also contends that Policy for 2020-21 is applicable to all and sundry; thus it cannot be said that it has been framed to give benefit to a particular person and/or contractor.
3.4 Further vehemently contends that the Policy for 2020-21, which is alleged to have been amended by co-accused-Bharat Bhushan Sharma @ Ashu to benefit certain contractor(s) including petitioner, was challenged before this Court in CWP No. 10707 of 2020 and CWP No. 10656 of 2020. However, the writ petitions were dismissed and the amendment was upheld by the then Division Bench(es) vide separate orders dated 27.07.2020 & 28.07.2020. 3.5 Also specifically contends that petitioner, being the successful bidder, has been falsely implicated in the present case by the complainant on the allegations that at the time of getting the tender, he had supplied registration numbers of the vehicles, which were later found to be of motorcycles, scooters and/or three wheelers etc. 3.6 Still further contends that the allegations levelled against petitioner are baseless since only trucks were used for the purpose, but on account of some bona fide typographical mistake, wrong registration numbers of vehicles were supplied and same has been taken as deliberate act, by Vigilance Bureau 4 of 9 ::: Downloaded on - 24-12-2024 21:25:41 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:171878 CRM-49136-2024 IN/AND -5- CRM-M-24089-2024 (O&M) with mala fide intention; there has been no fraud committed by petitioner what- soever and admittedly, no loss has been caused to the Government Exchequer since entire goods were transported by petitioner in proper manner. 3.7 Lastly contended that case of petitioner is at par with co-accused- Paramjit Chechi, whose petition (CRM-M-34685-2024) for quashing the aforesaid FIR No. 11 dated 16.08.2022, has been allowed vide order of even date (20.12.2024) and present petition also deserves to be allowed in the same terms.
4. ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT 4.1 Per Contra, learned State counsel opposes the prayer of the petitioner(s) while submitting that co-accused-Bharat Bhushan Sharma @ Ashu, being the Minister of Food, Civil Supplies & Consumer Affairs, was solely responsible for amendment in the Policy for 2020-21. The amendment was made by co-accused-Bharat Bhushan Sharma @ Ashu with an ulterior motive to extend benefit to the persons who were near and dear to him including the petitioner.
4.2 Further submits that complainant-Gurpreet Singh in his statement dated 21.08.2022 specifically stated that co-accused-Bharat Bhushan Sharma @ Ashu used to collect bribe from contractor(s) including the petitioner who were allotted tenders in different districts of Punjab through his favourite contractor-Telu Ram. Complainant-Gurpreet Singh further stated that he and his associate contractor(s) had made several complaints earlier also regarding the aforesaid scam, but to no avail.
4.3 Still further submits that another witness of this case, namely, Rohit Kumar had stated that illegal linkage of Lalton and Dhandra Mandis with centre at Ludhiana instead of Qila Raipur, was made by accused officials, at the 5 of 9 ::: Downloaded on - 24-12-2024 21:25:41 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:171878 CRM-49136-2024 IN/AND -6- CRM-M-24089-2024 (O&M) instance of co-accused-Bharat Bhushan Sharma @ Ashu in complete derogation of letter dated 30.09.2021 of Food Corporation of India. 4.4 Lastly submitted that by virtue of disclosure made by co-accused Telu Ram, recovery of pocket diary was effected, which contained entries of bribe given, the modus operandi of the officials, Minister, his associates and favourite contractor(s) and as such, complicity of petitioner and his co-accused is well apparent.
However, learned State counsel has fairly acknowledged that case of petitioner is on the similar footing as that of co-accused-Paramjit Chechi.
5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the paper book.
6. DISCUSSION AND OBSERVATIONS 6.1 Before proceeding further, the relevant clause of the Policy for 2020-21 is recapitulated as under:-
"GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB DEPARTMENT OF FOOD, CIVIL SUPPLIES AND CONSUMER AFFAIRS ANAJ BHAVAN, SECTOR 39-C, CHANDIGARH
------
THE PUNJAB FOODGRAINS LABOUR & CARTAGE POLICY 2020-2021
-----
The Government of Punjab, through its Food Procuring Agencies and the Food Corporation of Indía procures food grains (mainly paddy and wheat) on behalf of the Government of India, from various purchase centers situated in the State of Punjab. The procured food grains are then stored at different plinths /Godowns owned/ hired by State Procurement Agencies. The Cartage of food grains from mandis to various storage points, including rice mills, situated up to 8 KM from such mandi(s) is got done from various contractors and the Labour operations in the godowns (including P.E.G) are got carried out from Labour & Construction Societies, Worker Management Committees and other labour contractors, on the basis of contracts awarded through 6 of 9 ::: Downloaded on - 24-12-2024 21:25:41 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:171878 CRM-49136-2024 IN/AND -7- CRM-M-24089-2024 (O&M) competitive tenders. The Policy, for Labour and Cartage of foodgrains for the year 2020-21 shall be as under: -
1 to 4 .............................................................................
5. Technical Qualifications:-
A to F .......................................................................................... G. In case of tenderer applying for cartage, either alone or along with labour, Tenderer must have minimum turn over from the cartage work of foodgrains of Govt agencies in any one financial year out of previous 3 financial years i.e., from 2017-18 to 2019-20 depending upon the capacity of cluster applied for:-
Sr. Total arrival of wheat/paddy(whichever isMinimum No. higher) in Mandis in previous year falling turnover under one cluster. required (In (Only Mandi(s) from which cartage has to Rupees) be done to be included to calculate capacity).
1. Up to 5000 M.T. 10,00,000
2. 5001 Μ.Τ. to 10,000 Μ.Τ. 20,00,000
3. 10,001 M.T. to 20,000 Μ.Τ. 40,00,000
4. 20,001 Μ.Τ. to 30,000 Μ.Τ. 60,00,000
5. 30,001 M.T. to 40,000 Μ.Τ. 80,00,000
6. 40,001 Μ.Τ. to 50,000 Μ.Τ. 1,00,00,000
7. 50,001 Μ.Τ. to 75,000 Μ.Τ. 2,00,00,000
8. 75,001 Μ.Τ. to 1,00,000 M.T. 3,00,00,000
9. Above 1,00,000 M.T. 4,00,00,000 Note 1:- Copy of the audited balance sheet of the concerned financial year shall be uploaded with the Technical Bid as proof of turnover." 6.2. It is noteworthy that vide order of even date (20.12.2024) passed in CRM-M-34685-2024 filed by co-accused-Paramjit Chechi, the petition for quashing of present FIR, has been allowed and the operative part of the aforesaid order is, for reference, extracted herein below:-
" 8.3 Apart that, it is discernible that petitioners-
Sukhwinder Singh Gill, Harveen Kaur and Paramjit Chechi were nominated without any valid basis by the complainant-Gurpreet 7 of 9 ::: Downloaded on - 24-12-2024 21:25:41 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:171878 CRM-49136-2024 IN/AND -8- CRM-M-24089-2024 (O&M) Singh and witness Rohit Kumar (another associate contractor of complainant) and as such, it can be safely said that present case has been registered by Vigilance Bureau without verification of the actual facts. Even no mens rea can be attributed to petitioners- Sukhwinder Singh Gill & Harveen Kaur merely being the Government Employees; rather they discharged their duties with due diligence.
8.4 As far as petitioner-Paramjit Chechi (successful bidder) is concerned, the unsuccessful bidder(s) (complainant- Gurpreet Singh as well as witness-Rohit Kumar) had an axe to grind against him to wreak their vengeance. Mere bald allegation of providing fake registration numbers of vehicles i.e. motorcycles, scooters and/or three wheelers by petitioner-Paramjit Chechi, does not constitute any offence; particularly when there has been no loss to the State Exchequer and the required quantity of foodgrains was duly delivered well in time.
8.5 Also discernible that confessional statement of co- accused Telu Ram recorded in police custody would be inadmissible in law and hit by Sections 25 and 26 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.
8.6 Thus, there is no hesitation to observe that allegations leveled in the FIR do not disclose any cognizable offence and at best, complainant could have availed remedy of judicial review against the amended Policy for 2020-21; but certainly, there was no occasion to prosecute the petitioner(s) on that count. 8.7 In view of the facts and circumstances discussed herein above, launching of prosecution by complainant-Gurpreet Singh (unsuccessful bidder) is nothing, but an example of giving a cloak of criminal offence to the contractual matter for Procurement and Transportation of foodgrains.
9. In such a scenario, the irresistible conclusion would be that criminal proceedings have been initiated against petitioner(s) by the Vigilance Bureau at the instance of complainant, just to harass them and as such, it amounts to misuse 8 of 9 ::: Downloaded on - 24-12-2024 21:25:41 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:171878 CRM-49136-2024 IN/AND -9- CRM-M-24089-2024 (O&M) of powers by the Bureau, for the reasons, which are unknown to law.
Therefore, it is a fit case to exercise the inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C to prevent the abuse of process of law."
7. Admittedly, role ascribed to the present petitioner is at par with co- accused-Paramjit Chechi, against whom present FIR has been quashed by this Court vide order of even date (20.12.2024) and as such, present petition also deserves to be allowed.
8. Consequently, this Court is left with no option, except to allow the present petition.
9. Ordered accordingly.
10. As a result, FIR No. 11 dated 16.08.2022, registered under Sections 120-B, 409, 420, 467, 468 & 471 of the IPC & Sections 7, 7-A, 8, 12 & 13(2) of the PC Act at Police Station, Vigilance Bureau, District Ludhiana and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, are quashed and set aside qua the petitioner.
Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed off.
20.12.2024 ( MAHABIR SINGH SINDHU )
Harish Kumar JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether Reportable Yes/No
9 of 9
::: Downloaded on - 24-12-2024 21:25:41 :::