Dismissed

Upendra Sharma v. The State Of Bihar through Superintendent Of Police-cum-i.o. Vigilance Department, Investigation Bu

Patna HC7 Jul 2017CR. MISC./19629/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged the quashing of an order taking cognizance in a Prevention of Corruption Act case involving a trap. The court examined the procedure of the trap, its validity, and locus standi.

What did the court decide?

The Criminal Miscellaneous application for quashing the order is dismissed.

What the court decided

Upendra Sharma Vs The State Of Bihar through Superintendent Of… — Corruption | Patna HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

¶2

Criminal Miscellaneous No.19629 of 2014

¶3

Arising Out of PS.Case No. -44 Year- 2013 Thana -C.B.I CASE District- PATNA

¶4

=========================================================== Upendra Sharma S/o Late Siya Saran Sharma Resident of Village Raghunathpur, P.S- Paliganj, District- Patna, at present Headmaster Incharge Damodar High School, Raghunathpur, P.S- Paliganj, District- Patna.

¶5

.... .... Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar (through Superintendent of Police-cum-I.O. Vigilance Department, Investigation Bureau, Patna)

¶8

.... .... Opposite Party

¶9

=========================================================== Appearance :

¶10

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjeev Nikesh

¶11

For the Vigilance : Mr. Arvind Kumar

¶12

=========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 07-07-2017

¶13

The petitioner seeks quashing the order dated

¶14

17.09.2013 passed by Special Judge Vigilance 1, Patna in Special Case No. 49 of 2013 whereby and whereunder the learned Special Judge took cognizance under Section 7/13 (2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act.

¶15

Heard both sides.

¶16

The informant of this case is Deputy Superintendent of Police-cum-S.H.O of Vigilance Investigation Bureau. On the

¶17

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.19629 of 2014 dt.07-07-2017

¶18

2/4

¶19

complain of one Gaurvi Ranjan regarding demand of bribe of Rs. 2000/- by this petitioner for releasing an amount of Rs. 10,000/under the Chief Minister’s Encouragement Scheme, a trap was led after verification and preparation of pre trap memorandum. As per plan, the raiding party apprehended the petitioner while accepting the bribe of Rs. 2000/- from said Gaurvi Ranjan.

¶20

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the present case has been lodged at the instance of one Sanjay Kumar Sinha, who was a clerk in Government Damodar High school, Raghunathpur where the petitioner was incharge Headmaster of the same school. The petitioner had lodged Paliganj P.S. Case No. 160 of 2013 for the offence under Sections 467, 468, 471 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code against the said clerk as he had committed fraud and forgery in submitting forms of some of the students for registration on the basis of forged signature of the Headmaster. A departmental proceeding was also initiated by District Education Officer, Patna against the said clerk, Sanjay Kumar Sinha under Memo No. 5922 dated 05.06.2013. The informant of this case allegedly conducted raid and recorded the statement of two Rahul Kumar and Kumar Gaurav, who are son of brother-in-law and sonin-law of the said clerk. The Vigilance has not inquired about the

¶21

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.19629 of 2014 dt.07-07-2017

¶22

3/4

¶23

relationship of witnesses with the said clerk. The trap was allegedly led in a densely populated area from where no independence witness has been examined. The learned Special Judge without evaluating the materials available on record passed the order in a mechanical manner and so, the order is fit to be quashed.

¶24

The learned Special APP for the vigilance Department, on the other hand, opposed the submissions.

¶25

On perusal of the prosecution report and annexures enclosed with this application, I find that on the petition of a student regarding demand of bribe by the petitioner, a raiding party was constituted led by Maharaj Kanishk Kumar, Deputy Superintendent of Police Vigilance. Thereafter, pre-trap memorandum was prepared and the currency notes were dipped into phenolphthalein powder and the petitioner was caught red handed with the said currency. The persons who were present at the time of raid witnessed the occurrence. The learned Special Jude being satisfied with the process of the conducting trap and materials available on record rightly took cognizance under the aforesaid sections. At this stage, the petitioner has no locus standi to challenge the competency of witnesses.

¶26

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.19629 of 2014 dt.07-07-2017

¶27

4/4

¶28

In view of the discussions made above, I do not find any merit in this application. This Criminal Miscellaneous application is, accordingly, dismissed.

¶29

(Sanjay Kumar, J)

¶30

ajaypd./-

¶31

AFR/NAFR	NAFR
CAV DATE	NA
Uploading Date	08.07. 17
Transmission	08.07.
Date	17

Upendra Sharma v. The State Of Bihar through Superintendent Of Police-cum-i.o. Vigilance Department, Investigation Bu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Upendra Sharma v. The State Of Bihar through Superintendent Of Police-cum-i.o. Vigilance Department, Investigation Bu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Satyendra Yadav Vs The State Of Bihar

Sakaldeep Paswan and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar

Dharmendra Yadav Vs The State Of Bihar

Shatrudhan Singh Vs The State Of Bihar

Sudhir Kumar Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Md. Moid Alam @ Md. Moid and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar