news details |
|
|
| HC refuse to quash FIR of NGO who siphoned off lacs of rupees | | | Early Times Report
JAMMU, Aug 23: The Jammu & Kashmir High Court today dismissed the plea of petition filed by Suman Sharma President NGO, namely, M/s. SS Institute of Professional and Technical Education (Girls) against whom CBI has registered FIR, seeking quashment of the same.
According to the CBI that on 29.01.2015 under sections 120-B, read with sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 and 5(2) and 5(1) d of the J&K Prevention of Corruption Act against the petitioner, President of M/s. SS Institute of Professional and Technical Education (Girls), Som Nath, the then Assistant Director Handicrafts, Jammu and unknown others for criminal conspiracy, abuse of official position, cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property, forgery of valuable security, using the forged documents as genuine and thereby causing wrongful loss to the Government Exchequer. It has been alleged that the Assistant Director, Handicrafts in criminal conspiracy with the petitioner, President of M/s SS Institute of Professional and Technical Education (Girls), 564, Subhash Nagar Jammu, with dishonest and fraudulent intention, wrongly recommended the utilization certificate of programs of centrally sponsored schemes/workshop of the NGO for disbursement.
The funds to the tune of RS17,25,000/- approximately were siphoned off by the NGO without conducting the workshops. It was further alleged in the FIR that the petitioner, Suman Sharma, President of the Institute had misappropriated the honorarium of artisans by issuing bearer cheques those were encashed by the NGO.
Justice Rajnesh Oswal after hearing Sr. Adv Abhinav Sharma for the petitioner whereas Adv Monika Kohli for the CBI observed that it is evident that preliminary enquiry was registered against M/s. SS Institute of Professional and Technical Education (Girls) and 9 other NGOs on the basis of source information report that the NGOs through their representatives in league with the officials of marketing and service Extension centres Jammu under the office of Regional Director (NR) and Office of the Development Commissioner (Handicrafts), Ministry of Textiles, Government of India, New Delhi were wrongly got sanctioned centrally sponsored schemes/workshop and thereafter siphoned off Central Government funds worth crores of rupees without conducting workshops as per guidelines.
During the course of enquiry, it was found that the interventions 18 in numbers were not conducted properly or not conducted at all with mala fide intention to cheat the public as well as handicraft department. The panel designer was supposed to remain present at the workshop site for a specified time period that is ten days in a fifteen days workshop. However, enquiry revealed that the panel designers had attended the workshop on the day of inspection of the concerned Assistant Director only. It was also revealed during the enquiry that the fake utilization certificates were prepared and showed the compensation paid to the artisans through the cheques. The artisans disowned their signatures on the Acquaintance Roll in token of having received payments. The Handicraft Officer concerned instead of verifying the genuineness or otherwise of utilization certificates, countersigned the same which were used by the petitioner for reimbursement of second installment and adjustment of advance as first installment and thereby cause wrongful loss to the Government Exchequer. Certain other instances of irregularities were also mentioned in the enquiry report the details of which are not required to be mentioned herein. After the conclusion of the preliminary enquiry, FIR impugned was registered.
First contention that has been raised by the petitioner is that the FIR impugned does not disclose commission of any offence by the petitioner. The learned counsel had strenuously argued that once the sum of ? 5,42,000/- was returned by the NGO then how the NGO can misappropriate a sum of ? 17.25 lacs as mentioned in the FIR. The argument though attractive but deserves to be rejected because of simple reason that FIR need not be an encyclopedia and the purpose of the FIR is only to set the criminal law in motion, so as to find out the truth of the allegations leveled in FIR. The Investigating Officer during the course of investigation has considered this aspect and has come to the conclusion that a sum of ?11,83,000/-was received by the NGO as three interventions were returned by the petitioner.
The allegations levelled in the FIR required investigation that was initially stayed by this Court and subsequently the respondents were permitted to proceed ahead with the investigation. During the course of the investigation, the Investigating Officer has collected the incriminating material against the petitioner and the other accused so it cannot be said that there is no case against the petitioner. In the response filed by the respondents, it is evident that certain amounts have been shown to be paid against the cancelled cheques. The respondents had produced the proposed challan for the perusal of the Court and in the said challan, the details of misappropriation have been specifically mentioned. The claim of the petitioner that certain amounts paid validly by the NGO have not been taken into consideration during investigation though misconceived, is a disputed question of fact and cannot be adjudicated upon in a petition under section 561-A( now 482) Cr.P.C. The contention of the petitioner that the present petition has been filed with the ulterior motive just to falsely implicate the petitioner is also misconceived as it was not only the NGO of the petitioner but also nine other NGOs, those were the subject matter of the enquiry.
Justice Rajnesh Oswal while dismissing the petition observed that the allegations levelled in the FIR against the petitioner disclose the commission of cognizable offence and further in view of the investigation conducted by the Investigating Officer, this is not a case that warrants the exercise of powers under section 561-A (now 482) Cr.P.C. for quashing the FIR. —JNF |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
