Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 382 (RAJ)

Goresh Kumar v. State of Rajasthan

2016-03-08

MAHESH CHANDRA SHARMA

body2016
JUDGMENT : Mahesh Chanra Sharma, J. 1. This bail application has been filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. with the following prayer: "It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this bail application under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. may kindly be allowed and the petitioner may be granted anticipatory bail in case of arrest in FIR No. 66/2015 lodged at P.S. Pratap Nagar, Jaipur, District Jaipur." 2. Brief facts of the case are that the allegation against the petitioner is that he took Rs. 60,000/- and entered into an agreement with the complainant to sell his house, which was to be delivered soon by the Rajasthan Housing Board. Further allegation was that the complainant deposited a sum of Rs. 23,87,000/- only in Raj. Housing Board in pursuance of contract. The Raj. Housing Board later on denied the registry of the house to the complainant because the accused had already taken the refund in the year 1998, therefore, the complainant filed an FIR No. 66/2015 at PS Pratap Nagar, Jaipur, District Jaipur for the offences mentioned therein. 23,87,000/- only in Raj. Housing Board in pursuance of contract. The Raj. Housing Board later on denied the registry of the house to the complainant because the accused had already taken the refund in the year 1998, therefore, the complainant filed an FIR No. 66/2015 at PS Pratap Nagar, Jaipur, District Jaipur for the offences mentioned therein. The police interrogated the petitioner and is bent upon to arrest the petitioner, therefore, due to apprehension of arrest, the petitioner moved the anticipatory bail application before the court below, but the same was dismissed vide order dated 4.2.2016 with the following observations:- ^^dsl Mk;jh ds voyksdu ls izrhr gksrk gS fd izkFkhZ@vfHk;qDr us jktLFkku vkoklu e.My t;iqj dh lkekU; iathdj.k ;kstuk 1982 esa iathdj.k jkf'k 4]600@& :i;s tek djok dj vkosnu fd;k Fkk rFkk mDr jkf'k ls mldk iathdj.k dj fy;k x;k Fkk ijUrq foHkkx us mDr iathdj.k jkf'k e; C;kt ds izkFkhZ@vfHk;qDr dks okil ykSVk nh xbZ] tks jkf'k izkFkhZ@vfHk;qDr dks izkIr gks xbZ ijUrq mlds ckotwn Hkh izkFkhZ@vfHk;qDr ds }kjk iqu% LofoRr iksf"kr ;kstuk esa iwoZ iathd`r vkosnd gksuk crkrs gq, ek/;e vk; oxZ ^^oh** gsrq fnukad 17-09-2012 dks vkosnu dj fn;k rFkk iathdj.k djok fy;kA mDr iathdj.k dks fnukad 31-07-2012 dks izkFkhZ@vfHk;qDr ds }kjk ifjoknh fo".kq nRr 'kekZ dks fodz; djus dk eq[R;kjvke fu"ikfnr dj fn;kA ifjoknh }kjk mDr eq[R;kjukek ds vuqlkj vkoklu e.My esa 23]87]000@& :i;s dh jkf'k tek djok nh rFkk ckn esa ifjoknh mDr edku dh jftLVªh vius gd esa djkus ds fy, vkoklu e.My esa x;k rks ogkWa ls tkudkjh feyh fd xksjs'k dqekj dk iwoZ iathdj.k o"kZ 1982 fujLr dj fn;k x;k gS rFkk mlds }kjk tek djokbZ jkf'k e; C;kt mldks ykSVk nh xbZ gS] bl dkj.k vc dksbZ edku vkoaVu ugha fd;k tk ldrkA bl izdkj izkFkhZ@vfHk;qDr ds }kjk tc mlds }kjk o"kZ 1982 esa iathdj.k jkf'k vkoklu e.My ls izkIr fd;s tkus dk ckotwn Hkh iqu% u;k vkosnu i= is'k dj iathdj.k djok;k vkSj ml iathdj.k ds vuqlkj vkoafVr edku dks ifjoknh dks cSpkus dk bdjkj dj mlds lkFk /kks[kk/kM+h dj jkf'k izkIr dj yh rFkk vkoklu e.My esa tek djok nhA vHkh ekeyk vuqla/kkuk/khu gS] ;fn izkFkhZ vfHk;qDr dks vfxze tekur dk ykHk ns fn;k tkrk gS] rks vuqla/kku ij foijhr izHkko iM+sxkA vr% ekeys ds mijksDr leLr rF;ksa o ifjfLFkfr;ksa dks n`f"Vxr j[krs gq, izdj.k ds xq.kkoxq.k ij dksbZ fVIi.kh fd;s fcuk eSa bl Lrj ij izkFkhZ@vfHk;qDr dks vfxze tekur ij fjgk fd;k tkuk U;k;ksfpr ugha ikrk gwaA** 3. Against the said judgment/order dated 4.2.2016, the instant bail application has been filed. 4. This court vide order dated 11.2.2016 has passed the following order: "List the matter on 12.2.2016. On the said date the I.O. of the case shall remain personally present before this court along with the case diary." 5. Thereafter on 15.2.2016, this court has passed the following order:- bl ekeys esa vkt vk;qDr] jktLFkku vkoklu e.My dks U;k;ky; ds le{k ryc fd;k x;k D;ksafd jktLFkku vkoklu e.My esa iw.kZ :i ls Hkz"Vkpkj O;kIr gksuk izrhr gksrk gSA vkt Jh 'kadj dqekor] lfpo] jktLFkku vkoklu e.My bl U;k;ky; ds le{k mifLFkr gSa] ftUgksaus dFku fd;k fd vk;qDr] vkoklu e.My dh rfc;r [kjkc gksus ls mUgksaus nks fnol dk vodk'k ys fy;k gS ,oa mUgksaus U;k;ky; ds le{k viuh vuqifLFkfr ds lEcU/k esa ekQh pkgh gSA fdUrq ;g U;k;ky; blls lUrq"V ugha gSA ,slk izrhr gksrk gS fd os U;k;ky; ds le{k viuh mifLFkfr dks Vkyuk pkgrs gSa D;ksafd jktLFkku vkoklu e.My esa iwjh rjg ls Hkz"Vkpkj O;kIr gSA U;k;ky; muls bl ckjs esa iz'u iwNuk pkgrk gS fdUrq mUgksaus vkt vkoklu e.My ds lfpo dks U;k;ky; ds le{k Hkstk gSA vkt bl U;k;ky; ds le{k bl ekeys ds vuqla/kku vf/kdkjh Jh lw;Zohj flag ,l0,p0vks0 iqfyl Fkkuk izrki uxj] t;iqj bZLV e; dsl Mk;jh ds O;fDr'k% mifLFkr gSaA mUgsa funsZ'k fn;k tkrk gS fd os Jh vks0ih0 ehuk v/;{k@vk;qDr] jktLFkku vkoklu e.My ds fuokl ij tkdj bl U;k;ky; ds vkns'k ls lwfpr djsa fd mUgsa U;k;ky; ds le{k fnukad 17-02-2016 dks mifLFkr gksuk gSA izdj.k dks fnukad 17-02-2016 dks U;k;ky; ds le{k lwphc) fd;k tkosA 6. Again on 17.2.2016, this court has passed the following order: "Mr. O.P. Meena, Chairman-cum-Commissioner, Rajasthan Housing Board, Jaipur is present in person. He undertakes to enquire into not only this matter but all other matters which come in his knowledge or f having in his knowledge. After making thorough investigation, he will take appropriate action against those persons who are indulged in such matters against Housing Board. For that purpose, he seeks two weeks time for necessary action. List this case on 8.3.2016. The Chairman-cum-Commissioner shall remain present on the next date before this court." 7. Mr. After making thorough investigation, he will take appropriate action against those persons who are indulged in such matters against Housing Board. For that purpose, he seeks two weeks time for necessary action. List this case on 8.3.2016. The Chairman-cum-Commissioner shall remain present on the next date before this court." 7. Mr. Anirudh Singh, counsel appearing for the petitioner has requested this court that he does not want to press the bail application on the ground that he has already moved a petition under Sec. 482 Cr.P.C., hence bail application should be dismissed as withdrawn. 8. On the other hand, learned Addl. Advocate General along with other counsel oppose the submissions advanced on behalf of petitioner and requested that bail application should have been dismissed. Mr. Anurag Sharma, Addl. Advocate General has submitted the factual report, which is taken on record, and along with that report he has annexed a letter dated 24.2.2016 whereby Sh. Shankar Lal Kumawat, Secretary, Raj. Housing Board requested to the Director General of Police, Anti Corruption Bureau, Jaipur to investigate the matter thoroughly and properly. The said letter is reproduced as under:- ^^egksn;] mijksDr fo"k;kUxZr ys[k gS fd Jh xksjs'k dqekj xqIrk us o"kZ 1982 esa eaMy dh lkekU; iathdj.k ;kstuk ds vUrxZr vkokl vkoaVu gsrq iathdj.k djk;k FkkA vkokl vkoVau gsrq okafNr ekax jkf'k tek ugha djkus ds dkj.k o"kZ 1998 esa Jh xksjs'k dqekj xqIrk dks iathdj.k jkf'k e; C;kt okfil ykSVk nh xbZA Jh xqIrk us 1998 esa iathdj.k jkf'k izkIr gks tkus ds ckotwn mDr iathdj.k ,oa feF;k 'kiFki= ds vk/kkj ij o"kZ 2012 esa iqu% vkosnu dj e.My dfeZ;ksa ds lg;ksx ls vkokl la[;k 105@233 dk vkoaVu djk fy;kA bl izdj.k dh izkjfEHkd tkWap eq[; vfHk;ark ¼eq[;ky;½ ,oa rRi'pkr~ 5 lnL;h; desVh }kjk djkbZ xbZ ¼tkWap fjiksVZ dh izfr layXu gS½ tkWap fjiksVZ ds vuqlkj o`Rr Lrj ds 9 deZpkjh mDr izdj.k esa izFke n`"V;k vfu;ferrk] in ds nq:i;ksx ,oa Hkz"Vkpkj ds nks"kh ik, x, gSaA ekuuh; mPp U;k;ky; }kjk fnukad 17-02-2016 dks fn;s x;s funsZ'kkuqlkj ,oa izdj.k dh izkjfEHkd tkWap ds vk/kkj ij e.My }kjk lEiw.kZ izdj.k Hkz"Vkpkj fujks/kd C;wjks dks izsf"kr fd;s tkus dk fu.kZ; fy;k x;k gSA vr% vkils vuqjks/k gS fd mDr izdj.k dh foLr`r tkWap dj fu;ekuqlkj vfxze dk;Zokgh djkus dk Je djsaA** 9. At this stage, Mr. At this stage, Mr. Anurag Sharma, AAG has requested this court that the Bureau of Anti Corruption is examining the matter properly before lodging an FIR as required under the law. 10. Accordingly, in view of the above, this court passes the following order but with appropriate directions/observations: (i) the bail application is dismissed as withdrawn; (ii) the Director General of Police, Anti Corruption Bureau, Jaipur is directed to investigate not only this matter thoroughly and properly but also other matters pending before the Housing Board which smells out corruption and thereafter, after proper examination and making preliminary enquiry, if the investigating agency reaches on the conclusion that the offence is made out, then lodge the FIR against the persons who are directly or indirectly involved in the corruption in the Housing Board and after lodging the FIRs, submit the progress report of the investigation before the concerned court of Anti Corruption; (iii) This bail application is dismissed with the aforesaid directions/observations.