Interim Order 4

Order Details: COPY OF JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS
Pdf Text: IN THE COURT OF SPECIAL JUDGE (PC ACT) (ACB)02,
ROUSE AVENUE DISTRICT COURTS, NEW DELHI
Presided by: Jay Thareja, DHJS
CC No.58/23
State v Ct. Surender Kumar & Ors.
FIR No.1/2015
PS Vigilance
20.11.2023
At 04:00 pm.
Present : IO Inspector Shyam.
1. The chargesheet filed by the State (through IO Inspector Shyam)
has been perused.
2. In the chargesheet, it has been alleged that the accused, HC
Ashok Kumar, Ct. Surender Singh and Ct. Pankaj are liable to be prosecuted and
convicted qua the commission of offences punishable under Section 7 and
Section 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988
(henceforth 'PC Act, 1988') because the subject video, shot by the complainant,
Sh. Irshad Khan (which has been found to be genuine by FSL, Rohini, vide report
dated 29.07.2016), reflects that on 17.11.2014, Ct. Surender Singh had taken
bribe/money from Sh. Munna Ansari, in the presence of the coaccused, Ct.
Pankaj and HC Ashok Kumar; because during investigation of this case, the
complainant, Sh. Irshad Khan has supported his complaint dated 08.12.2014 and
the contents of the subject video, shot by him and because during investigation of
this case, the accused, HC Ashok Kumar has not given his voice sample and
thereby, added credence to the case of the State.
3. In order to verify the aforesaid allegations of the State, I have inter
alia perused (a) the complaint dated 08.12.2014 of the complainant, Sh. Irshad
Khan, (b) the transcript of the subject video, (c) the FSL report dated 29.07.2016,
-- 1 of 2 --
(d) the DD entry etc., reflecting duty of HC Ashok Kumar, Ct. Surender Singh and
Ct. Pankaj on the PCR van no.DL1CP8164, on 17.11.2014, (e) the orders dated
10.04.2018 and 11.04.2018, passed by Sh. Dinesh Kumar, the then Ld. MM08,
Central District, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi and (f) the sanction order dated
01.02.2018, passed by Sh. Devender Arya, DCP. Thereafter, I have inquired from
the IO, Inspector Shyam as to why he has not invoked Section 34 or Section
120B of IPC, 1860, in respect of the joint liability of the accused, HC Ashok
Kumar, Ct. Surender Singh and Ct. Pankaj. In response thereto, the IO, Inspector
Shyam has submitted that inadvertently, he has not invoked Section 34 of IPC,
1860 and that the same may be invoked by this Court, without requiring him to
take back the chargesheet and make the necessary correction. The signatures
of the IO, Inspector Shyam have been taken on this ordersheet, as
acknowledgement of the said submission. Keeping in view, the vintage of the FIR
of this case, the submission made by the IO, Inspector Shyam is accepted.
4. From the abovenoted material and the submission made by the IO,
Inspector Shyam, I am satisfied that this case is ripe for proceeding against the
accused, HC Ashok Kumar, Ct. Surender Singh and Ct. Pankaj under Section 7
and Section 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the PC Act, 1988 read with
Section 34 of IPC, 1860.
5. Accordingly, in exercise of the power available under Section 190(b)
of CrPC, 1973, the cognizance of the abovenoted offences is taken and it is
directed that summons shall be issued against all the accused persons (who
have been chargesheeted without arrest by the State), returnable on 02.01.2024.
(JAY THAREJA)
Special Judge (PC Act)(ACB)02
Rouse Avenue District Courts, New Delhi
20.11.2023
-- 2 of 2 --