Punjab-Haryana High Court
M/S Jagroop Singh And Sandeep Kumar vs State Of Punjab And Others on 20 December, 2024
Author: Mahabir Singh Sindhu
Bench: Mahabir Singh Sindhu
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:171878
111
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-49136-2024 IN/AND
CRM-M-24089-2024 (O&M)
Date of decision: 20.12.2024
M/s Jagroop Singh and Sandeep Kumar through
its partner-Jagroop Singh ...Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab and others ...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHABIR SINGH SINDHU
Present: Mr. Vardaan, Advocate for
Mr. Prateek Gupta, Advocate for the applicant-petitioner.
Dr. D.S. Lamba, DAG, Punjab.
******
MAHABIR SINGH SINDHU, J.
CRM-49136-2024
Application under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha
Sanhita, 2023 for recalling the order dated 02.12.2024.
Notice of the application to non-applicant/respondents.
At this stage, Mr. D.S. Lamba, learned DAG, Punjab accepts
notice on behalf of non-applicant/respondents and has not raised serious
objection to the prayer made by applicant/petitioner.
In view of the above and for the reasons mentioned in the
application, same is allowed as prayed for subject to all just exceptions. With
the consent of both parties, main case is taken up on Board today itself.
Main case
Present petition under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure,
1973, (for short ‘Cr.P.C.’), inter alia, for seeking quashing of FIR No. 11 dated
16.08.2022, registered under section 409, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120B of
1 of 9
::: Downloaded on – 24-12-2024 21:25:40 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:171878
CRM-49136-2024 IN/AND -2-
CRM-M-24089-2024 (O&M)
Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short ‘IPC‘) and Sections 7, 8, 12 & 13(2) of
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, as amended vide Amendment Act, 2018
(for short ‘PC Act‘) at Police Station Vigilance Bureau, Ludhiana and all other
consequential proceedings arising therefrom, qua the petitioner.
2. BRIEF FACTS:
2.1 It transpires that one Gurpreet Singh son of Shri Swaran Singh,
resident of House No.218, Street No.4, Durgapuri Vistar, Police Station,
Nandnagri, Delhi-110093 (now residing at Guru Teg Bahadur Nagar, District
Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar, Punjab) submitted written complaint dated
02.03.2022 to Chief Director, Vigilance Bureau, Punjab, which was forwarded
to Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vigilance Bureau, Ludhiana, resulting into
registration of FIR No. 11 dated 16.08.2022 against petitioner and other co-
accused.
2.2 Primarily, allegations in the aforesaid FIR are that co-accused –
Bharat Bhushan Sharma @ Ashu, being Minister of Food, Civil Supplies &
Consumer Affairs, Government of Punjab made certain amendments while
notifying “The Punjab Foodgrains Labour & Cartage Policy 2020-2021” (for
short “the Policy for 2020-21”).
It is further alleged that in the Policy for previous year i.e. 2019-
2020, there was no clause with regard to minimum turnover and every person
was eligible to take part in the bidding process; however, in the year 2020-21,
new sub-clause-G in clause 5 was inserted regarding “minimum turnover” from
the cartage work of foodgrains of Govt. agencies in any one financial year out
of previous 3 financial years i.e. from 2017-2018 to 2019-2020; hence the fresh
participants were debarred being ineligible.
2 of 9
::: Downloaded on - 24-12-2024 21:25:41 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:171878
CRM-49136-2024 IN/AND -3-
CRM-M-24089-2024 (O&M)
It is also alleged that due to amendment in the Policy for 2020-21,
the capacity of cluster was increased and as a result thereof, the competition
was decreased. In this manner, it is alleged that contracts were allotted to some
‘favorites’ of co-accused-Bharat Bhushan Sharma @ Ashu, including the
petitioner and bids of other contractors were rejected. Again alleged that huge
loss was caused to the public exchequer by co-accused-Bharat Bhushan Sharma
@ Ashu in connivance with petitioner and other accused while hatching
criminal conspiracy, committing forgery, using forged documents as genuine
and some of the government official(s) receiving kickbacks in return.
CONTENTIONS
3. ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER
3.1 Learned counsel for petitioner contends that present case has been
registered out of political vengeance on behalf of the ruling Government of
Aam Aadmi Party in order to suppress the voice of co-accused-Bharat Bhushan
Sharma @ Ashu, who is a former Minister of Food, Civil Supplies &
Consumer Affairs of Punjab.
3.2 Further contends that as per the Policy for 2020-21, there was a
Tender Allotment Committee for each district in the State of Punjab, headed by
District Controller consisting of 07 members, who were responsible for
conducting the e-auction and giving the tenders. At that time, although co-
accused-Bharat Bhushan Sharma @ Ashu was Minister of Food, Civil Supplies
& Consumer Affairs, Government of Punjab, but he was not the member of any
of the District Tender Allotment Committees and as such, no decision regarding
the allotment of tender was taken by him. Even for District Ludhiana, there was
an independent District Tender Allotment Committee, headed by Mr. Manish
Narula, Deputy Director as its Chairman. The approval for amendment in the
3 of 9
::: Downloaded on – 24-12-2024 21:25:41 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:171878
CRM-49136-2024 IN/AND -4-
CRM-M-24089-2024 (O&M)
Policy for 2020-21 was accorded by respective District Tender Allotment
Committees and thereafter, the matter was sent to the Department of Finance,
Government of Punjab for its concurrence. On receipt of the consent from the
Finance Department, the case was forwarded to the Cabinet for its approval,
which was duly granted and thereafter the amendment in the Policy for 2020-
21 was carried out. Thus, it is wrong to allege that it is only co-accused-Bharat
Bhushan Sharma @ Ashu, who being a Minister, had amended the Policy for
2020-21.
3.3 Also contends that Policy for 2020-21 is applicable to all and
sundry; thus it cannot be said that it has been framed to give benefit to a
particular person and/or contractor.
3.4 Further vehemently contends that the Policy for 2020-21, which is
alleged to have been amended by co-accused-Bharat Bhushan Sharma @ Ashu
to benefit certain contractor(s) including petitioner, was challenged before this
Court in CWP No. 10707 of 2020 and CWP No. 10656 of 2020. However, the
writ petitions were dismissed and the amendment was upheld by the then
Division Bench(es) vide separate orders dated 27.07.2020 & 28.07.2020.
3.5 Also specifically contends that petitioner, being the successful
bidder, has been falsely implicated in the present case by the complainant on
the allegations that at the time of getting the tender, he had supplied registration
numbers of the vehicles, which were later found to be of motorcycles, scooters
and/or three wheelers etc.
3.6 Still further contends that the allegations levelled against petitioner
are baseless since only trucks were used for the purpose, but on account of
some bona fide typographical mistake, wrong registration numbers of vehicles
were supplied and same has been taken as deliberate act, by Vigilance Bureau
4 of 9
::: Downloaded on – 24-12-2024 21:25:41 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:171878
CRM-49136-2024 IN/AND -5-
CRM-M-24089-2024 (O&M)
with mala fide intention; there has been no fraud committed by petitioner what-
soever and admittedly, no loss has been caused to the Government Exchequer
since entire goods were transported by petitioner in proper manner.
3.7 Lastly contended that case of petitioner is at par with co-accused-
Paramjit Chechi, whose petition (CRM-M-34685-2024) for quashing the
aforesaid FIR No. 11 dated 16.08.2022, has been allowed vide order of even
date (20.12.2024) and present petition also deserves to be allowed in the same
terms.
4. ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT
4.1 Per Contra, learned State counsel opposes the prayer of the
petitioner(s) while submitting that co-accused-Bharat Bhushan Sharma @
Ashu, being the Minister of Food, Civil Supplies & Consumer Affairs, was
solely responsible for amendment in the Policy for 2020-21. The amendment
was made by co-accused-Bharat Bhushan Sharma @ Ashu with an ulterior
motive to extend benefit to the persons who were near and dear to him
including the petitioner.
4.2 Further submits that complainant-Gurpreet Singh in his statement
dated 21.08.2022 specifically stated that co-accused-Bharat Bhushan Sharma
@ Ashu used to collect bribe from contractor(s) including the petitioner who
were allotted tenders in different districts of Punjab through his favourite
contractor-Telu Ram. Complainant-Gurpreet Singh further stated that he and
his associate contractor(s) had made several complaints earlier also regarding
the aforesaid scam, but to no avail.
4.3 Still further submits that another witness of this case, namely,
Rohit Kumar had stated that illegal linkage of Lalton and Dhandra Mandis with
centre at Ludhiana instead of Qila Raipur, was made by accused officials, at the
5 of 9
::: Downloaded on – 24-12-2024 21:25:41 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:171878
CRM-49136-2024 IN/AND -6-
CRM-M-24089-2024 (O&M)
instance of co-accused-Bharat Bhushan Sharma @ Ashu in complete
derogation of letter dated 30.09.2021 of Food Corporation of India.
4.4 Lastly submitted that by virtue of disclosure made by co-accused
Telu Ram, recovery of pocket diary was effected, which contained entries of
bribe given, the modus operandi of the officials, Minister, his associates and
favourite contractor(s) and as such, complicity of petitioner and his co-accused
is well apparent.
However, learned State counsel has fairly acknowledged that case
of petitioner is on the similar footing as that of co-accused-Paramjit Chechi.
5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the paper book.
6. DISCUSSION AND OBSERVATIONS
6.1 Before proceeding further, the relevant clause of the Policy for
2020-21 is recapitulated as under:-
“GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB
DEPARTMENT OF FOOD, CIVIL SUPPLIES AND
CONSUMER AFFAIRS
ANAJ BHAVAN, SECTOR 39-C, CHANDIGARH
——
THE PUNJAB FOODGRAINS LABOUR & CARTAGE POLICY
2020-2021
—–
The Government of Punjab, through its Food Procuring Agencies
and the Food Corporation of Indía procures food grains (mainly paddy
and wheat) on behalf of the Government of India, from various
purchase centers situated in the State of Punjab. The procured food
grains are then stored at different plinths /Godowns owned/ hired by
State Procurement Agencies. The Cartage of food grains from mandis to
various storage points, including rice mills, situated up to 8 KM from
such mandi(s) is got done from various contractors and the Labour
operations in the godowns (including P.E.G) are got carried out from
Labour & Construction Societies, Worker Management Committees and
other labour contractors, on the basis of contracts awarded through
6 of 9
::: Downloaded on – 24-12-2024 21:25:41 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:171878
CRM-49136-2024 IN/AND -7-
CRM-M-24089-2024 (O&M)competitive tenders. The Policy, for Labour and Cartage of foodgrains
for the year 2020-21 shall be as under: –
1 to 4 …………………………………………………………………..
5. Technical Qualifications:-
A to F ………………………………………………………………………………
G. In case of tenderer applying for cartage, either alone or along with
labour, Tenderer must have minimum turn over from the cartage work of
foodgrains of Govt agencies in any one financial year out of previous 3
financial years i.e., from 2017-18 to 2019-20 depending upon the
capacity of cluster applied for:-
Sr. Total arrival of wheat/paddy(whichever isMinimum
No. higher) in Mandis in previous year falling
turnover
under one cluster. required (In
(Only Mandi(s) from which cartage has to Rupees)
be done to be included to calculate
capacity).
1. Up to 5000 M.T. 10,00,000
2. 5001 Μ.Τ. to 10,000 Μ.Τ. 20,00,000
3. 10,001 M.T. to 20,000 Μ.Τ. 40,00,000
4. 20,001 Μ.Τ. to 30,000 Μ.Τ. 60,00,000
5. 30,001 M.T. to 40,000 Μ.Τ. 80,00,000
6. 40,001 Μ.Τ. to 50,000 Μ.Τ. 1,00,00,000
7. 50,001 Μ.Τ. to 75,000 Μ.Τ. 2,00,00,000
8. 75,001 Μ.Τ. to 1,00,000 M.T. 3,00,00,000
9. Above 1,00,000 M.T. 4,00,00,000
Note 1:- Copy of the audited balance sheet of the concerned financial
year shall be uploaded with the Technical Bid as proof of turnover.”6.2. It is noteworthy that vide order of even date (20.12.2024) passed
in CRM-M-34685-2024 filed by co-accused-Paramjit Chechi, the petition for
quashing of present FIR, has been allowed and the operative part of the
aforesaid order is, for reference, extracted herein below:-
” 8.3 Apart that, it is discernible that petitioners-
Sukhwinder Singh Gill, Harveen Kaur and Paramjit Chechi were
nominated without any valid basis by the complainant-Gurpreet
7 of 9
::: Downloaded on – 24-12-2024 21:25:41 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:171878
CRM-49136-2024 IN/AND -8-
CRM-M-24089-2024 (O&M)
Singh and witness Rohit Kumar (another associate contractor of
complainant) and as such, it can be safely said that present case
has been registered by Vigilance Bureau without verification of the
actual facts. Even no mens rea can be attributed to petitioners-
Sukhwinder Singh Gill & Harveen Kaur merely being the
Government Employees; rather they discharged their duties with
due diligence.
8.4 As far as petitioner-Paramjit Chechi (successful
bidder) is concerned, the unsuccessful bidder(s) (complainant-
Gurpreet Singh as well as witness-Rohit Kumar) had an axe to
grind against him to wreak their vengeance. Mere bald allegation
of providing fake registration numbers of vehicles i.e. motorcycles,
scooters and/or three wheelers by petitioner-Paramjit Chechi,
does not constitute any offence; particularly when there has been
no loss to the State Exchequer and the required quantity of
foodgrains was duly delivered well in time.
8.5 Also discernible that confessional statement of co-
accused Telu Ram recorded in police custody would be
inadmissible in law and hit by Sections 25 and 26 of the Indian
Evidence Act, 1872.
8.6 Thus, there is no hesitation to observe that allegations
leveled in the FIR do not disclose any cognizable offence and at
best, complainant could have availed remedy of judicial review
against the amended Policy for 2020-21; but certainly, there was
no occasion to prosecute the petitioner(s) on that count.
8.7 In view of the facts and circumstances discussed
herein above, launching of prosecution by complainant-Gurpreet
Singh (unsuccessful bidder) is nothing, but an example of giving a
cloak of criminal offence to the contractual matter for
Procurement and Transportation of foodgrains.
9. In such a scenario, the irresistible conclusion would
be that criminal proceedings have been initiated against
petitioner(s) by the Vigilance Bureau at the instance of
complainant, just to harass them and as such, it amounts to misuse
8 of 9
::: Downloaded on – 24-12-2024 21:25:41 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:171878
CRM-49136-2024 IN/AND -9-
CRM-M-24089-2024 (O&M)
of powers by the Bureau, for the reasons, which are unknown to
law.
Therefore, it is a fit case to exercise the inherent
powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C to prevent the abuse of process
of law.”
7. Admittedly, role ascribed to the present petitioner is at par with co-
accused-Paramjit Chechi, against whom present FIR has been quashed by this
Court vide order of even date (20.12.2024) and as such, present petition also
deserves to be allowed.
8. Consequently, this Court is left with no option, except to allow the
present petition.
9. Ordered accordingly.
10. As a result, FIR No. 11 dated 16.08.2022, registered under
Sections 120-B, 409, 420, 467, 468 & 471 of the IPC & Sections 7, 7-A, 8, 12
& 13(2) of the PC Act at Police Station, Vigilance Bureau, District Ludhiana
and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, are quashed and set aside
qua the petitioner.
Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed off.
20.12.2024 ( MAHABIR SINGH SINDHU )
Harish Kumar JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether Reportable Yes/No
9 of 9
::: Downloaded on - 24-12-2024 21:25:41 :::