JUDGMENT This application has been filed for quashing of the entire criminal proceeding of Vigilance P.S case no.3 of 2004 (Special Case no.4 of 2004) whereby and whereunder cognizance of the offences punishable under Sections 420, 409, 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code and also under Section 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act was taken against the petitioner. 2. It is the case of the prosecution that upon information being given by the then Dy. Superintendent of Police, Vigilance, Ranchi that some irregularities have been committed by the Chief Medical Officer-cum-Civil Surgeon/ Additional Chief Medical Officer, Palamau at Daltanganj in the matter of purchase of medicines for the year 2000 to September, 2002, a preliminary enquiry was made wherein it was found that medicines had been purchased by the office of the Chief Medical Officer/Additional Chief Medical Officer, Palamau at Daltanganj on much higher rate, though it was available on much lower rate. 3. Upon such allegation, FIR was lodged. After investigation charge sheet was submitted, upon which cognizance of the offences punishable under Sections 420, 409, 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code and also under Section 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act has been taken against the petitioner by learned Special Judge, Vigilance, Ranchi, vide its order dated 16.11.2011 which is under challenge. 4. It was submitted by Mr. Sen, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that as per the case of the prosecution, when orders were placed for supply of medicines by the office of Chief Medical Officer/Additional Chief Medical Officer to Rajasthan Drugs and Pharmaceuticals Limited, a Government Company to which the petitioner is an authorized agent, it supplied the medicines through the petitioner, an authorized agent of the said company. Upon supply of the medicines, a case was lodged on the allegation that Chief Medical Officer/ Additional Chief Medical Officer before placing orders did not prepare tabular/comparative chart so as to have minimum price on which medicines be procured but it is the policy of the Government as is apparent from a letter bearing no.280(5) dated 31.7.2011 that for purchasing medicines manufactured by the Government Company no tender is to be issued. In such situation, no such tabular/comparative chart is required to be made. 5. In the instant case, orders were placed for supply of medicines Cotton Gauge, Bandage cloth etc. In such situation, no such tabular/comparative chart is required to be made. 5. In the instant case, orders were placed for supply of medicines Cotton Gauge, Bandage cloth etc. which also falls within the definition of drug and also for Vitamin B Complex, it were supplied through the petitioner being an authorized dealer, still a case was lodged which is quite misconceived and thereby in order to prevent the miscarriage of justice, order taking cognizance is fit to be set aside. 6. In this regard, it was further submitted that Investigating Officer on one hand, submitted charge sheet against the petitioner but on the other hand, he exonerated other authorized dealer of the Company on the ground that in a case where the order is placed to the Government Company, tabular/comparative chart needs not to be prepared. 7. Mr. Shailesh, learned counsel appearing for the Vigilance by placing statement made in the counter affidavit/supplementary counter affidavit submitted that a Purchase Committee was formed for purchasing the medicines etc. for the year 2000 and 2001-02. For the said purpose, a comparative chart was prepared whereby rates of medicines were approved and a decision was taken that the medicines would be purchased on minimum price only. 8. Learned counsel by drawing attention to the comparative chart as annexed as Annexure D to the supplementary counter affidavit, pointed out that approved rate of Vitamin B Complex was Rs.92/-per thousand as per the rate quoted by the Rajasthan Drugs and Pharmaceuticals Limited (RDFL) but the petitioner did charge Rs.105 per thousand tablet. 9. It was further submitted that as per the case, the drugs manufactured by the Government Company is to be purchased by the Government Company but the petitioner supplied cotton absorbent, bandage cloth etc. by claiming that it has been manufactured by M/s. Bengal Immunity to which the petitioner claimed to be an authorized dealer but in fact, it was procured from Shiv Cotton Processor and Laxmi Shankar Textiles respectively and thereby it does appear that this petitioner in collusion with other accused persons put the State exchequer to a loss. 10. Under the circumstances, the court cannot be said to have committed any illegality in taking cognizance of the offence. 11. 10. Under the circumstances, the court cannot be said to have committed any illegality in taking cognizance of the offence. 11. Thus, having heard learned counsel appearing for the parties, it does appear that as per the comparative chart prepared during meeting of the Purchase Committee, the rate, which was approved for supply of Vitamin B Complex, was Rs.92/-per thousand tablet but it has been supplied @ Rs.105/-per thousand tablet and even payments were made to the petitioner. 12. Under the circumstances, I do not find any substance in the submission advanced on behalf of the petitioner that prosecution is wholly misconceived. 13. Thus, I do not find any illegality with the order taking cognizance. Accordingly, this application stands dismissed. 14. Before parting with this order, it be recorded that any observation made before this Court may not be prejudicial to the case of the parties.