Cuttack: Orissa High Court has pulled up a Court of Special Judge (vigilance) for "palpable error" in framing corruption charges against an officer.
The high court expressed its disapproval while considering a plea seeking its intervention against the rejection of a discharge petition and framing of charges by the vigilance court in a corruption case.
It held that "there is no prima facie case for commission of the offences alleged against the petitioner" based on the available material on record. It also said the investigating officer had "failed to collect any clinching materials to proceed against the petitioner and acted in a mechanical manner".
The state vigilance had registered a case against Baishnab Charan Barik, a junior engineer in charge of Odisha Tribal Development Project stores at Kashipur, for his alleged involvement in bungling cement supply for the project in 2002.
When the vigilance submitted the charge sheet in the Court of Special Judge (vigilance), Jeypore, Barik filed a discharge petition pleading innocence.
But, the trial court rejected his petition and framed charges against him under Section 420 of the IPC along with other sections of the Prevention of Corruption Act in February 2008. Barik challenged it in the high court that same year. The petition was allowed on February 22.
The single-judge bench of Justice S.K. Sahoo held that there was no ground to presume that the petitioner had committed the alleged offences.
Justice Sahoo observed: "The trial judge has mechanically dealt with the discharge petition filed by the petitioner and, after quoting the prosecution allegation, he jumped to the conclusion that there are sufficient grounds for proceeding against the petitioners and rejected the petition."
"I am of the humble view that the learned trial court has committed palpable error in framing charges against the petitioners after rejecting the discharge petition and, as such, in the interest of justice, the impugned order cannot be sustained in the eye of law," Justice Sahoo ruled.
