Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2012 DIGILAW 769 (JHR)

Durga Oraon v. State of Jharkhand

2012-05-17

APARESH KUMAR SINGH, PRAKASH TATIA

body2012
ORDER 1. We have perused the supplementary counter affidavit filed on behalf of the Vigilance Bureau, Ranchi. 2. It has been submitted that in Vigilance P. S. Case No. 26 of 2008 the charge-sheet no. 21 of 2009 was filed on 5th October, 2009 against two accused persons and in pursuance of the order dated 4th August, 2010 passed in W.P. (PIL) No. 4700 of 2008, the case has been transferred to the C.B.I. for further action. In Vigilance P. S. Case No. 09 of 2009, Charge sheet no. 05/10 dated 28th January, 2010 and 06/10 dated 28th January, 2010 respectively have been submitted against Madhu Koda and Kamlesh Singh. Pursuant to order dated 4th August, 2010 passed in the same W.P. (PIL), the case was transferred to the C.B.I. for further action. Vigilance P.S. Case no. 52 of 2010 wherein there are 20 named accused persons, Chart sheet no. 11/11 dated 28th February, 2011 against Vinod Kumar Sinha and Charge sheet no. 23/11 dated 30th March, 2011 against Madhu Koda have already been submitted. However, the case is under supplementary investigation. Vigilance P.S. Case no. 38/10 Charge sheet no. 9/11 dated 23rd February, 2011 has been filed against Madhu Koda and Vinod Sinha and by virtue of Notification no. 6/CBI-709/2011-3313 dated 20.08.2011 of Jharkhand Government (Home), this case has also been transferred to the C.B.I. for further action. In paragraph 6 of the supplementary counter affidavit, it is submitted that yet another Charge sheet no. 15/10 has been submitted on 15th April, 2010. 3. However, it appears from the affidavit that in the cases either investigation has not been completed with respect to some of the accused persons and part charge sheets have been filed. It also appears from the above affidavit that the matters have been sent to the C.B.I. obviously for investigation. At this juncture, it is relevant to mention here that according to the learned counsel for the petitioner there appears to be a gap between the Income Tax Department and the C.B.I and therefore the investigation may not be going on against some of the accused persons, who were also involved in the cases of criminal activities. 4. At this juncture, it is relevant to mention here that according to the learned counsel for the petitioner there appears to be a gap between the Income Tax Department and the C.B.I and therefore the investigation may not be going on against some of the accused persons, who were also involved in the cases of criminal activities. 4. We are of the considered opinion that C.B.I. may submit the status report of the cases, which are pending with it and are subject matter in this writ petition or are arising out of the orders passed in this writ petition. 5. Learned counsel for the C.B.I. submitted that the C.B.I. is in a position to submit status report by tomorrow (18.5.2012). 6. In view of the above, put up this case tomorrow (18.5.2012) for submitting the report by C.B.I. 7. In addition to the above, this Court has already inquired about the status of respondent nos. 14 to 20 and State has submitted in para 7 of the affidavit that no other preliminary inquiry or regular cases except mentioned above, are pending against respondent nos. 14 to 20 or any other persons connected with them. It has been made clear that in course of investigation at a later stage if the complicity of any of the above mentioned persons comes to light the C.B.I. is duty bound to act as per law and the same will be brought to the notice of the High Court. Since, yet matter is under investigation before the C.B.I. , therefore, at this stage, there is not need to pass any order against respondent nos. 14 to 20. It is submitted that the status report may also make it clear with respect to their coordination with the Income Tax Department and any of the department may it be State police or the Vigilance Department or the Enforcement Department, so that the matter may be investigated fairly and if needed action may be taken expeditiously, as the matter is already delayed for two years even from the date of sending the cases to the C.B.I. 8. Learned counsel for the C.B.I. has placed on record the status report on sting operation in a seal cover, which has been opened and perused and the report will be considered and thereafter appropriate order will be passed. 9. Learned counsel for the C.B.I. has placed on record the status report on sting operation in a seal cover, which has been opened and perused and the report will be considered and thereafter appropriate order will be passed. 9. Learned Registrar General is directed to keep two sets of status report in seal cover with him. 10. Let a copy of the order be given to the learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the C.B.I. In future the names of the counsels may also be shown in the cause list. Ordered accordingly.