Can quash fir in this issue?
gopinathan
(Querist) 06 July 2016
This query is : Resolved
A head of Office was trapped by Vig.&Anti Corrupt.based on a contractor complaint.He is suspended. Later in past 8 months he collected several documents about the contractor through RTI in various dept.Following shows the contractor as a social evil elements.
1)later on a petition filed by the HO ,Madras HC ordered on 30/6/2016 in WP34990/2015 the works carried out by the contractor should be tested in Highways Research Station.Until Bank security may be given by contractor for 55 lakhs before pass the bills.(before trap the HO took disciplinary action against the contractor for his quality less road works)
2)The contractor manipulated or forged commercial tax officers signature and seal and prepared 100s of certificates and evaded VAT of 6 lakhs sofar. Last week he was charged u/s 420,468,471 of IPC
3)To find out exact evasion of tax,now a special audit is conducting in office by the order of department director
4)Now the contractor is absconded and seeking for AB at HC
5)Similarly , recently come to light that contractor himself printed so many firm invoices and produced to the HO as he purchased cement, steel, HP motors etc.and got lakhs of contract payments.Now CT dept enforcement wing confirmed that those are not real firms.This may be filed another FIR shortly against the contractor.
Now pl advice whether the officer can challenge the contractor' complaint and quash FIR on him by vigilance dept.? or should he meet the case as usual in the trial court? still charge sheet not filed on HO.Which way is better.
R.K Nanda
(Expert) 06 July 2016
Query too long.
R.K Nanda
(Expert) 06 July 2016
Query too long.
R.K Nanda
(Expert) 06 July 2016
Query too long.
Devajyoti Barman
(Expert) 06 July 2016
who are you and how are you related to this query?
Rajendra K Goyal
(Expert) 07 July 2016
The author has not preferred to reply the question raised by the expert Devajyoti Barman.
Illegal acts of contractor does not shield / give license / permit the head of department for the corruption. Case is separate. Officer can not escape the responsibility even for the previous misdeeds of the contractor and was duly accepted, if department prefer to proceed.
Action separately taken against the contractor for his misdeeds.
Sudhir Kumar, Advocate
(Expert) 07 July 2016
query is long but relevant facts are still not here.
In such like cases it may not be possible for you to put all facts on this website.
You may not get a comprehensive advise atleast on this issue.
You have to meet a lawyer with paper and sit with him.
P. Venu
(Expert) 07 July 2016
Please post the simple facts.
gopinathan
(Querist) 13 July 2016
Mr.Barman sir, HO is my friend. On behalf of him i raised this query. HO initiated action disciplinary action against those contractors. Thats why a stage managed corruption complaint made against the HO. Fact is purely motive due to safe them.
Guest
(Expert) 13 July 2016
Mr. Gopinath,
Being BDO, how you are concerned with the case against the Head of the Office? May the HO be your friend, but, as a via media, not being your personal case, you won't be able to satiasfy the queries of the experts.
Moreover, in your query, you have not made even a slightest mention that any case was been filed in the court against the HO and under which sections of law and by whom. So from where the question arises about quash of which petition?
A question arises, has he not hired any lawyer, if any court case has been filed against him on corruption? If hired, you should have made a mention about the opinion of his lawyer and the grounds for that opinion.
However, in departmental inquiry, if initiated on suspension of the HO, has no relevance with the court case, false documents or evasion of tax pertaining to contractor. He has to defend his own case as against the nature of charge leveled against him, in order to prove his innocense, irrespective of whether the corruption case was stage managed or not. Any facts found through RTI about false documents,or tax evasion, etc., of the contractor has no relevance with the case of the HO unless he had already referred in his notings, while processing the case against the contractor.
Both the cases have to be proved independently by respective prosecution, whosoever be, of each case and to be defended on merits of each case, but not by any unconnected material.
SUPER SPECIALTY SERVICES FOUNDATION (INDIA)
P. Venu
(Expert) 16 July 2016
The query is based on inchoate understanding of Law and its concepts and the procedure. I am afraid your friend, the alleged HO would only tying up himself in knots.
Guest
(Expert) 16 July 2016
Venu ji,
It may be his own case, but does not want to bring full facts before the experts.
