Saurabh Malik
Chandigarh, October 21
More than two years after a Gurugram court forwarded a criminal complaint against public servants, including three IAS officers, to a local police station for lodging an FIR and investigation, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has set aside the order against them after describing it as illegal.
The matter relates to alleged illegal possession and construction of factories, warehouse, residential and commercial buildings in notified ‘open space’ in Gurugram’s Sector 94. Justice Karamjit Singh asserted the complainant had attempted to invoke Section 156(3) of the CrPC against the petitioner- public servants. The provision makes it clear that a magistrate may order investigation in a matter, if the police authority does not perform its duty to register an FIR.
Justice Karamjit Singh asserted: “A valid sanction/approval as per law would be required before proceeding further in the matter. Admittedly, in the case in hand, no such previous sanction/approval has been sought by the complainant to prosecute the petitioners. Consequently, the impugned order dated July 3, 2020, being illegal is hereby set aside qua the petitioners. The petitions stand allowed”.
The matter was brought to the High Court’s notice after four petitions were filed against the State of Haryana and another respondent by IAS officers Vinay Pratap Singh, Jitetnder Yadav and K. Makrand Pandurang, among others, through senior advocate RS Rai with Gautam Dutt and Anurag Arora.
Referring to the complaint, Justice Karamjit Singh observed the complainant had alleged that “many” land grabbers had raised illegal constructions in form of factories, warehouses, residential and commercial buildings in the open space.
The complainant had added that the accused were responsible for grabbing public land, public nuisance, endangering human life, conspiracy against state, illegally gaining money, laundering of illegally gained money and corruption. The state officials, on the other hand, were supporting the illegal acts. It was also alleged that the culprits had political patronage. As such, the local police were under their pressure and the administration was not taking any action.
Justice Karamjit Singh asserted it was settled law that there has to be an application of mind even at the stage of Section 156(3) CrPC, while directing an investigation. The court concerned cannot act in a mechanical and mindless manner. The application of mind should be reflected in the order.
“From the perusal of the impugned order, it appears that the Court concerned passed the order without due application of mind, just in a mechanical manner. The mere statement that he (Presiding Officer) has gone through the complaint, documents and heard the complainant, as reflected in the impugned order, will not be sufficient and on this sole ground the impugned order being vitiated, deserves to be set aside,” Justice Karamjit Singh added.
No sanction
“A valid sanction/approval as per law would be required before proceeding further in the matter. Admittedly, in the case in hand, no such previous sanction/approval has been sought by the complainant to prosecute the petitioners”
— Justice Karamjit Singh
