Satish Kumar vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others
2019 Latest Caselaw 689 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

									  A.F.R.
 
									Reserved on : 25.2.2019
 
									Delivered on : 7.3.2019
 
Court No. - 51
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 4778 of 2019
 

 
Petitioner :- Satish Kumar
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Ajay Kumar Sharma,Sheshadri Trivedi,Shri Satish Trivedi (Sr. Advt.)
 
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Vipin Sinha,J.

Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.

(Delivered by Hon. Ajit Singh, J.)

Heard Sri Satish Trivedi, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Sheshadri Trivedi, Sri Ajay Kumar Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Rajesh Mishra, learned A.G.A. for the State.

This criminal misc. writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with a prayer to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned F.I.R. dated 3.6.2018 bearing Case Crime no. 421 of 2018, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B I.P.C. and Section 13 Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, P.S. Kasna, district-Gautam Budh Nagar. A further prayer has been made for directing the respondents not to arrest the petitioner consequent to the First Information Report.

The brief facts alleging to this writ petition are that an F.I.R. was lodged by one Sri Gjendra Singh, Pratisar Nirikchak against the officials/officers of the Yamuna Expressway, Industrial Development Authority and other persons on 3.6.2018, which was registered as Case Crime no. 421 of 2018, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B I.P.C. and Section 13 Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Although the petitioner is not specifically named in the first information report. In the said F.I.R. it was mentioned that after perusal of the inquiry report dated 8.12.2017 of Maha Prabandhak, Niyojan (General Manager, Planning) and report of the Executive Officer of Yamuna Expressway, Industrial Development Authority dated 7.5.2018 in the same matter, the Chairmperson of Yamuna Expressway, Industrial Development Authority/Commissioner Meerut, Division Meerut found that in district Mathura, Yamuna Expressway Industrial Development Authority had purchased land of seven villages namely, Madaur, Seupatti Bangar, Seupatti Khadar, Kaulana Bangar, Kaulana Khadar, Sautipura Bangar and Navjheel Bangar, in respect of which a total payment of Rs. 85.49 crore was made. These lands were alleged to be purchased by the close relatives, friends and other persons who were relatives of Sri P.C. Gupta, the then Chief Executive Officer and other Officers of Yamuna Expressway, Industrial Development Authority. These officers in collusion with their relatives and acquaintances had got the said land purchased for price which was more than double of actual price and thus they caused the financial loss to Yamuna Expressway, Industrial Development Authority. Those relatives and acquaintances of the above mentioned officers, in collusion with each other had got the lands of those seven villages purchased at various places at much higher prices and it is worth mentioning that approximately 57.1549 hec. of land which was purchased, remained unutilized/vacant till now and there is no possibility of being used in future as well. It was also mentioned in the F.I.R. that the said lands were purchased for three schemes for construction of Entry and Exit Ramps on Yamuna Expressway, there was a strong possibility of fast development of the said region. It was further alleged in the F.I.R. that whatever land was purchased there, out of that, some land was not utilized for construction of Exit or Entry Ramps, because in the plan/map, the land was being shown much away from the Ramps. Moreover, no administrative approval to purchase of that land was obtained nor the said land was proposed for construction of Ramps. In purchasing of said lands several irregularities were committed namely, the lands which were distributed among seven villages at different places, were not integrated and all these Khasras were separated from each other, which is evident from perusal of the map. The so acquired lands were lying vacant on the spot. The rate of acquisition of these lands was kept much higher from the rate which was prevalent at that time, details of which are mentioned in the First Information Report. It is further mentioned in the F.I.R. that the lands in question were purchased from the farmers by relatives and friends/acquaintances of the officers of Yamuna Expressway Industrial Development Authority then these lands were purchased by the authority at more than twice of its value without any necessity and procedure of purchase prevalent at that point of time was not adopted. Neither any public notice was advertised in a newspaper nor any publication was made for inviting objections. The lands were purchased contrary to the recommendations made by the committee which was constituted for identification of Khasra numbers in Abadi plots. It was further alleged that the land was not integrated and all the lands were not even. Out of 57.1549 hec. Of land purchased by the Authority, about 41 hec. Of land was purchased from just 19 persons of the companies who had purchased the said land just 2-4 months prior to purchase of those lands by authority, from the farmers and in relation to that land, an amount of Rs. 50 crores was paid to these persons/companies. These 19 persons/companies belong to Delhi, Gaziabad, Bulandshahar, Noida, Meerut and Agra. An inquiry was conducted by Mahaprabandhak, Niyojak (General Manager, Planning) regarding these companies and according to him all these companies were found to be sham companies which were made by some persons only in collusion with each other. Some of these companies owned by the relatives of the then Chief Executive Officer Sri P.C. Gupta and the other officials of Yamuna Expressway Industrial Development Authority, from whom the authority has purchased 0.9720 hec. of at Rs. 162.15 lac. The aforesaid accused persons had formed sham companies by preparing forged documents. It is also mentioned that the payments were made very cleverly as they were made in small cheques of about 30-30 lac each, so that the authority had to bear the expenditure of registration on the higher side by having to get more number of registries done, although the intention was that the registries of the such smaller amounts may not come in notice easily.

It is further mentioned that the cheques which were deposited by six persons namely, Dhirendra Singh, Swati Deep Sharma, Nirdosh Chaudhari, Satyendra Kumar, Ajit Kumar Singh and Jogesh in Mahamegha Arvind Co-operative Bank Limited, which has been closed and it was done under thought out conspiracy because the bank employees were also in collusion with them.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the petitioner had joined his services as Deputy CEO in Yamuna Expressway Industrial Development Authority and subsequently he was promoted on the post of Additional CEO till his transfer to the post of Special Secretary Department of MSME, Government of U.P., Lucknow. Further contention is that the then Chief Executive Officer Shir P.C. Gupta and his team of officials under a criminal conspiracy, got purchased land of above seven villages of district Mathura, throught their relatives, friends and some companies owned by such persons on payment of more than double price, causing pecuniary loss to the authority and petitioner has not committed any fraud and he is not named in the F.I.R. The petitioner met Dr. Prabhat Kumar, Chairman YEIDA and submitted a detailed representation to him on 23.6.2018, copy of which is annexed as Annexure-5 to the writ petition.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has also contended that the petitioner also met the then C.O/I.O. Sri Amit Kishore on 9.6.2018 and briefed him and his subordinate police officers about the facts of the case and he has co-operated in the investigation. He further contended that after retirement the petitioner is residing at Flat no. D-6/104, Supertech Czar Society, Sector Omicron-I Greater Noida, district-Gautam Budh Nagar. The Investigating Officer had never issued any notice under Section 41 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to the petitioner nor petitioner had ever evaded the investigation. The petitioner had got the cataract operation of both eyes at All Indian Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi on 20.8.2018 and 27.9.2018. After completion of investigation, the Investigating Officer has submitted police report on 18.9.2018. In Clause 16 where the brief facts of the case is described, one Satish Chandra Sharma as Deputy Executrive Officer is mentioned, in the context that he is one amongst other officers who discharged his duties in purchase of land.

The learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn our attention to the letter written by Dr. Prabhat Kumar, Director Yamuna Expressway Industrial Development Authority addressed to Addl. Chief Secretary (Niyukti Vibhag) at page no. 55 of the petition, wherein it has been clearly mentioned that in several files there are signatures of Deputy C.E.O. although Sri Satish Kumar had no role to play in purchase of lands. He has merely signed on some files with regard to the purchase that has been done by the then CEO Sri P.C. Gupta. The entire allegations leveled against the petitioner are false and concocted and he has been falsely implicated in the present case only on account of being officer of Yamuna Expressway Industrial Development Authority with the ulterior intention of harassing him.

It has been very vehemently contended by Sri Satish Trivedi, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioner that in the various sale deeds which were executed between the tenure holders and the authority, the petitioner is neither a vendor nor a vendee nor a beneficiary nor even a marginal witness in the execution of the sale deeds.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance upon the order of this Court dated 1.2.2019 passed in criminal misc. writ petition no. 2933 of 2019 (Soniya Bansal vs. State of U.P. and 2 Others). Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that similarly placed co-accused Soniya Bansal has granted interim protection by this Court vide order dated 1.2.2019 passed in criminal misc. writ petition no. 2933 of 2019, this Court feels that the petitioner cannot take the help of the above mentioned writ petition. In the above mentioned writ petition, the petitioner Soniya Bansal is said to be Director in the company in the year 2011 along with her husband and the company was transferred in the year 2013 in favour of one Satendra Kumar and Sanajeev Kumar and the entire share holding of the company was also transferred in the name of Satendra Singh and Sanjeev Kumar; that the petitioner in her capacity as a director of the company had already resigned as far back in the year 2014. The case of the present petitioner is distinguishable from that of above named petitioner.

Learned A.G.A. has submitted that similarly place co-accused namely Suresh Chand Sharma and Swatideep Sharma have filed writ petition being criminal misc. writ petition no. 17350 of 2018 and criminal misc. writ petition no. 17356 of 2018, which were rejected by another Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 4.7.2018 respectively.

We have gone through the entire facts of the case and have perused all the relevant documents which have been annexed with the petition and we are not convinced with the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner with respect to quashing of F.I.R. in the present matter because the allegations contained in the FIR do constitute cognizable offence against the petitioner and from the perusal of the FIR, it appears that heavy loss was inflected to the tune of several crores to the public exchequer by the officials of the Yamuna Expressway Industrial Development Authority in collusion with their relatives, friends and close acquaintances. The present petitioner was the part of the process, in which the lands were purchased on higher rates prevailing then in the market and it can not be said that the present petitioner had not known or could not have known that some mischievous activities are taking place in the pruchase of lands. It appears that the officers of Yamuna Expressway Industrial Development Authority have committed an organized crime with the help and aid and in collusion with their relatives, friends and close acquaintances and they have caused loss to the public exchequer and have tried to break the backbone of the economy of the State and nation by their illegal deeds, therefore, at this stage it would not be proper to quash the first information report when the police has submitted charge sheet against the accused after due investigation.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, this Court is not inclined to quash the F.I.R. dated 3.6.2018 and this Court is not inclined to issue a mandamus directing the respondents not to arrest the petitioner.

Hence, the present writ petition is accordingly dismissed.

Order Date : 7.3.2019

Faridul.