Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + HC Indian Laws - 2017 (1) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (1) TMI 824 - HC - Indian LawsComplain under Prevention of Corruption Act - whether the respondent police without any evidence implicated the petitioner/A1? - Held that:- Considering the submissions made on both sides and on perusal of the records and citations referred on behalf of the counsel for both parties, the contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner is not acceptable, the Division Bench has held otherwise and followed the directions of the Apex Court. Reliance was also placed upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Vineet Narain V. Union of India (1997 (12) TMI 615 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA) - "The CBI manual based on statutory provisions of the Cr.PC provides essential guidelines for the CBI's functioning. It is imperative that the CBI adheres scrupulously to the provisions in the Manual in relation to its investigative functions, like raids, seizure and arrests. Any deviation from the established procedure should be viewed seriously and severe disciplinary action taken against the officials concerned". Subsequently, this Court in various occasions expressed its view that Rules under Vigilance Manual are only administrative and on non-observance of the same, there is no mandatory violation, which would affect the validity of the prosecution. Once it is decided that the compliance of the rules of the DVAC Manual is not mandatory, if at all any officials violating the rules of manual the court should recommend for taking departmental action against the officials concerned, which will not go to the root of the case. As already stated, that this Court finds there are specific allegations made against this petitioner in the FIR, charge sheet and also in the statement given by the official witnesses recorded during the investigation under Section 161 Cr.PC, there are prima facie allegations made out against this petitioner. Merely because the tainted money has not been recovered from the petitioner/A1 directly, it is not a ground for quashing the proceedings. Further, it is settled proposition that latches on the part of prosecution will not vitiate the case. At this stage, this Court cannot interfere with the power of the trial Court by invoking the provisions contemplated under Section 482 Cr.PC, which is not automatic and it has to be invoked sparingly. It is already held that there is prima facie sufficient materials available to proceed against the accused, the petitioner has not made out any ground to quash the proceedings. The grounds taken are not valid under law and not sufficient to quash the proceedings. Under such circumstances, this Court is not inclined to invoke the discretionary powers given under Section 482 Cr.PC to quash the proceedings and the petition filed by the petitioner for quashing the proceedings is liable to be dismissed and the same is hereby dismissed. Criminal original petition is dismissed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is also closed.
|