Markandey Singh and Others vs State of U.P. and Others

Binod Kumar Roy and R.C. Deepak, JJ.—The four Petitioners have come up with a prayer to quash the first information report dated 28th February, 2002, giving rise to registration of Case Crime No. 68 of 2002 police station Line Bazar district Jaunpur under Sections 467, 468, 471, 247, 419, 409 and 420, Indian Penal Code

Sri U. N. Sharma, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioners urged that the impugned F.I.R. has been lodged at the instance of Mr. Barkhu Ram Verma, Member of the Legislative Assembly, Uttar Pradesh, as the Petitioners had refused to oblige him which is apparent from the documents Annexures-4, 6 and 6A. No offence has been made out against the Petitioners inasmuch as out of Rs. 15 lacs only a sum of Rs. 13,20,000 was released and balance of Rs. 1,80,000 is yet to be released for which the work is still pending.

A perusal of the F.I.R. in question shows that the accusation against the Petitioners is in relation to misappropriation of Rs. 2,16,468 by preparing forged and fabricated documents while doing the work of laying down earth and of painting on 2 kilometres Judpur-Gopalapur Road for which a sum of 15 lacs of rupees were sanctioned and it was lodged by Sri Umashanker Singh, the Project Director, District Village Development Adhikaran, Jaunpur against the Petitioners.

Apparently, prima facie the accusations made do constitute commission of cognizable offences by the Petitioners.

In fairness to Shri Sharma, we also looked at the three documents brought on the record. Annexure-4 shows that it is an undated letter or note of Shri B. R. Verma M.L.A. addressed to the Chief Development Officer, Jaunpur, intimating, inter alia, that after enquiry the width of the earth was found less and thus amount be released after deducting the appropriate cost of the earth used. Annexure-6 shows that it is a letter dated 13.6.2000 allegedly written by Mehi Lal Patel representative of the M.L.A. B. R. Verma to one J. E. Saheb (it does not show as to whom it has been addressed) requesting him to arrange for Rs. 1 lac and that he will meet tomorrow in Jaunpur Ganna Office and this obligation will be definitely compensated. Annexure-6A is a note or letter dated 29.11.2000 written again by Mehi Lal to J.E., Ganna Vibhag, asking him to meet him tomorrow dated 30.11.2000 intimating that he is in dire need of money and that the second instalment of the M.L.A. Fund is under encashment.

The correspondence prima facie shows, inter alia, that there appears to be some underhand transactions between the accused persons and the M.L.A. concerned. This is a serious aspect of the matter. The M.L.A. is a representative of the people who has been given funds for development of the society. The members of the Legislative Assembly are also trustees of the public and they cannot squander money allotted to them to be used for their personal purposes or for any other purposes except under the Scheme for which it has been allotted. He has tried to illegally collect or obtain money for his personal gains. A civil servant cannot be coerced by anyone to breach his loyalties to the Government. He is a trustee and he must discharge his duty without any influence of any one and strictly in accordance with law. In our socialistic welfare democratic fabric, if people, who are representatives of the people will act collusively, then the God alone can save the fate of our country. We, thus, direct the Investigating Officer of the crime case in question to find out the truth in this regard under the supervision of the Superintendent of Police, Jaunpur, and also to find out who others were responsible for misappropriating the Government money and to book all of them under appropriate law.

With these directions, this writ petition is dismissed.

Let a copy of this order be handed-over within one week to Sri L. V. Singh, learned A.G.A. for its intimation to and follow up action by the police authority concerned.

The office will also dispatch a copy of this order within one week to the Chief Secretary of the State for its intimation.