Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2012 DIGILAW 775 (JHR)

Durga Oraon-I v. State of Jharkhand

2012-05-18

APARESH KUMAR SINGH, PRAKASH TATIA

body2012
ORDER 1. Mr. R. R. Mishra, learned counsel for the State submitted that the name of the learned counsel for the petitioner has been shown in the order dated 17.05.2012 as Rajiv Ranjan, whereas Mr. Rajiv Ranjan is the Additional Advocate General and he is not appearing in this case for the petitioner and Mr. Rajiv Kumar is appearing for the petitioner. 2. Hence, the name of the learned counsel for the petitioner is corrected in the order dated 17.05.2012 in Court today in the cause title of the petition. 3. Learned counsel for the State further submitted that in case of any complicity of the respondent nos. 14 to 20 comes in the light to the State Vigilance Bureau then State Vigilance Bureau will act accordingly. However, in the page-2 of the order dated 17.05.2012 in place of State Vigilance Bureau, C.B.I. has been mentioned, which be read accordingly. It is made clear that the State’s contention was that in case any complicity of the respondent nos. 14 to 20 comes in the light then State Vigilance Bureau will act accordingly as the matter of respondent nos. 14 to 20 is not before the Central Bureau of Investigation. 4. A large number of interlocutory applications have been shown in cause list as pending. In this Public Interest Litigation several orders have been passed and the matters have been referred to the CBI also and, therefore, out of several, some of I.As. may be pending. Therefore, we deem it proper to direct the Office to make report about pending and decided Interlocutory Applications separately. 5. Learned counsel for the State as well as learned counsel for the CBI may give status of the matter pending before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the above Special Leave to Appeals (CC) No. 6742 of 2010 and correspondently SLP (Civil) No. 14319-14321/2010 and learned counsel for the State may also provide a copy of the Special Leave Petitions so as to know what is the matter pending before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. 6. Office is directed to look into all I.As. and order sheets and indicate which I.As. are still pending and which I.As. have been decided by appropriate order. 7. We have already taken note of the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that there is some gap between the Income Tax Department and the C.B.I. 8. 6. Office is directed to look into all I.As. and order sheets and indicate which I.As. are still pending and which I.As. have been decided by appropriate order. 7. We have already taken note of the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that there is some gap between the Income Tax Department and the C.B.I. 8. Learned counsel for the Income-Tax Department submitted that in some of the matters, except respondent no. 22, for all other respondents proceedings have been taken and assessment order has already been passed. We are not concerned with respect to what was the liability of the respondents of the Income-Tax in this matter and, therefore, it is for the CBI as well as State Vigilance Bureau to look into the matter and for that purposes they may collect evidence from anywhere, may be from the Income-Tax Department or from Enforcement Department. 9. Be that as it may be, it is for the investigating agency to take care that no person be spared, who is guilty according to the evidence collected in investigation and no other person be unnecessarily harassed. 10. Learned counsel for the CBI submitted status report, which we are taking on record. From the report, it appears that charge-sheet has been filed in both the matters, which has been transferred to the CBI and it is submitted that some of the matters are pending investigation and in two matters the CBI seeking prosecution sanction for prosecuting the persons under the P. C. Act 1988. The Central Bureau of Investigation, Enforcement Department and State Vigilance Department may now move fast in cases where challans have been filed against the some of the accused or all of the accused and they may also take full care of speedy trial by co-operating the Court. 11. Let a copy of the order be sent to the trial Court where the matters are pending so that the trial Court may proceed with the trial on day to day basis as far as possible. The all prosecuting agencies shall co-operate with the Court in getting the witnesses summoned without any delay. 11. Let a copy of the order be sent to the trial Court where the matters are pending so that the trial Court may proceed with the trial on day to day basis as far as possible. The all prosecuting agencies shall co-operate with the Court in getting the witnesses summoned without any delay. It is also made clear that if challans have been filed against the persons, who are absconding then the appropriate steps will be taken in accordance with law so as to separate the trial and again it is made clear that it should be not in hurried manner, but should be in accordance with law, by following the complete procedure of law so as to help in completing free and fair trial and un-influenced by any other reasons and for passing the reasoned judgements only. In some of cases the investigating agencies used to file challans in part against some of the accused keeping the matter pending before the trial Court where trial Court may not proceed and it may be blamed that delay is caused by the trial Court. Therefore, we are making it clear that all steps, in accordance with law, be taken by the trial Court, and investigating agencies are directed to co-operate with the Court in deciding these matters. 12. Central Bureau of Investigation, Enforcement Department and State Vigilance Bureau all will submit their affidavits stating with respect to the progress in the investigation. In the cases, where investigation is pending, steps be taken for completion of the investigation. 13. CBI has submitted progress reports, which are taken on records. 14. Put up these cases on 23rd July, 2012. 15. Let a copy of this order be given to the learned counsel for the parties. 16. Office is directed to report with respect to the pending I.As. and not to show the I.As. in the cause list, which have already been decided. 17. Learned Counsel for the CBI submitted that CBI may be in need of certain original documents from the Income-Tax Departments, we expect that Income-Tax Department will co-operate with the CBI by giving the required documents for completion of investigation. Ordered accordingly.