Research › Search › Judgment

Kerala High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 506 (KER)

Anil K R v. State of Kerala

2016-06-14

B.KEMAL PASHA

body2016
JUDGMENT B. Kemal Pasha, J. 1. Petitioners, who are the Director, National Coir Research and Management Institute(NCRMI), Thiruvananthapuram, Director(Retired), Directorate of Coir Development, Thiruvananthapuram and the Secretary(Coir Department) Government Secretariat, Thiruvananthapuram, have come up by challenging Ext.P20 order passed by the learned Enquiry Commissioner and Special Judge, Thiruvananthapuram in Crl.MP.No.809/013. 2. Serious allegations are raised by the 3rd respondent herein as complainant against these petitioners alleging misappropriation and misconduct. Misappropriation has been alleged to the tune of 3 crores and odd. The allegation is that under the guise of foreign tours for the promotion of coir products of Kerala, they have conducted a series of foreign tours. Apart from that they were instrumental in sending others also for such trade fairs all over the world. 3. Initially, the Government appointed a Commission for the study of development of coir industry and for necessary recommendations. Based on the recommendations of the Commission, a Consortium in the name and style as Kerala Coir Consortium was decided to be formed with public participation as well as private participation. Private participation was fixed to the tune of 38.77%. It seems that the Government had straight away allowed rupees six crores and seventy lakhs to the Consortium for the period from 2010 to 2014. At the same time, there was no contribution from the private sector. It seems that in fact, the consortium had never come into effect. Even then, it seems that crores of rupees was spent from the funds of the Consortium through various Government orders. It is also alleged that the petitioners and some others under them were instrumental in procuring such orders. 4. Initially, a quick verification was ordered and consequently Ext.P18 quick verification report was filed before the court below. The same was objected to by the 3rd respondent. Consequently, the court below has passed Ext.P20 order by which the court below has ordered registration of FIR by the VACB and for an investigation. It seems that presently such an investigation is on a standstill on account of the order of stay passed by this Court in the matter. Considering the seriousness of the allegations, this Court is of the view that the matter has to be investigated. It is true that the 3rd respondent had sought for the sanction of the Government for proceeding with the complaint. Through Ext.P19, the Government has declined sanction. Considering the seriousness of the allegations, this Court is of the view that the matter has to be investigated. It is true that the 3rd respondent had sought for the sanction of the Government for proceeding with the complaint. Through Ext.P19, the Government has declined sanction. That is not a matter to be dealt with at present. It is trite law that sanction is required under Section 19 of the P.C. Act for taking cognizance of the offence and not for the registration of the FIR or conducting investigation. When serious allegations are there against the petitioners as well as some others in the higher ups, let the matter be investigated into. 5. The investigating officer shall expedite the investigation and complete the investigation expeditiously, at any rate, within a period of six months from today. It is also made clear that this Court has not entered any observation or finding with regard to the merits of the matter. The petitioners are free to approach this Court or appropriate forum in the same matter, at appropriate stage, in case they are advised to do so. With the said observations, this O.P.(Crl.) is disposed of.