R.K.Ranga vs State of Haryana

R.L. Anand, J.

Having reasons to believe that he may be arrested in a non bailable offence, Shri R.K. Ranga, an IAS Officer posted as Senior Regional Manager, Food Corporation of India at Chandigarh, has filed the present petition under Section 438, Cr.P.C., against the respondents, seeking anticipatory bail in case FIR No. 10/R dated 6.1.1997, Police Station Civil Lines, Rohtak, under Sections 420, 109, 199, 200 read with Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code.

The FIR in this case was registered on the basis of one application given to the SHO, Police Station, Civil Lines, Rohtak, by Shri Narain Prasad Goel, resident of Anaj Mandi, Rohtak, stating that he earlier made a written complaint on 12.9.1996 to the higher authorities and to the Ministers to the effect that under the Open Sale Scheme, wheat being allocated to the Government of Haryana, which is distributed as per the directions given by the petitioner, who had distributed 70% to 80% of the total wheat to the Roller Flour Mills alone. It is also stated that wheat was allotted through his agent Shri Om Narain, who is working as A.G.II in the office of the District Manager, F.C.I, Rohtak, and to only those persons who pay Rs. 30/ per bag to him. It is further stated in the application that it could not be given to the traders for the month of August 1996 and for that reason the FCI has to extend the date for the sale of the wheat upto September 15, 1996. Shri Ranga petitioner created three categories viz. Flour Mills, Atta Chakkis and Traders against the rules. The applicant also was a trader holding permit No. HFA 549 and he deposited a draft for the purchase of 200 bags of wheat on 29.8.1996 with the FCI Rohtak under the Open Market Scheme. This draft was handed over to Shri Om Narain Sharma, who demanded a bribe of Rs. 30/ per bag and he also told the complainant in the presence of Shri Rajender Kumar Bansal, Secretary, that the demand was being made as per the instructions of the present petitioner Shri Ranga. When the complainant refused to pay the extra amount as demanded by Shri Om Narain, the latter refused to accept the draft and clearly stated that he would not accept the draft till extra amount at the rate of Rs. 30/ per bag is paid to him. On 6.9.1996 the complainant purchased a pay order for a sum of Rs. 28,750/ drawn on State Bank of India. This draft was also not received by Shri Om Narain, who stated that since the complainant had made complaints against him and the petitioner, therefore, he would not accept the draft. As a result of this, the complainant sold his draft to M/s Siri Chand Ram Chander. This firm was also not allotted full wheat for nonpayment of the bribe. The complainant had also learnt that in October 1996, five thousand bags of wheat were allotted at the rate of Rs. 490/ per quintal to a flour mill, which had closed for the last 2/3 years. Similarly, during the month of November 1996 the same firm was released wheat under the Open Market Scheme. The complainant has further alleged in his application that the wheat of this firm was going to be transported to Delhi but was detained by the Sales Tax Authorities on 29.11.1996 along with the goods receipt. Thus, the owner of that firm made a lot of money in one day by selling the wheat in the black market. The firm which had already closed its business for the last 2/3 years had furnished a false certificate for the allocation of the wheat under the Open Market Scheme. It is further alleged by the complainant Shri Narain Prasad Goel that there are several agents who are colluding with the employees and authorities of the FCI and they are defeating the Open Market Scheme by the sale of wheat in the black market and earn huge profits. Those persons had committed serious offence by deceiving the Government and by disallowing the wheat/flour to the ordinary consumer and there was a great resentment to that effect in the general public. Several complaints were earlier lodged regarding which there was publication in the newspapers. Again on 6.1.1997 the complainant was assured through Jansatta newspaper that the grievances of the ordinary consumers and traders would be heard. On the said application of Shri Narain Prasad Goel case was registered.

The allegations of the prosecution further are that there is a scheme known as OMSS (D), i.e., Open Market Sale Scheme (Domestic) and this scheme was floated by the FCI in October 1993 in accordance with the provisions of Section 13(2)(c) of the Food Corporation Act, 1964 and under this scheme some guidelines were issued to the Senior Regional Managers by the FCI. According to this scheme, tenders for the sale of wheat were to be invited from the prospective buyers through advertisement in the daily regional newspapers and thereafter the FCI prepared a list of the prospective buyers and then the list was sent to the Senior Regional Managers and after that those applications were scrutinised by the Committee consisting of Senior Regional Manager, Director, Food and Supplies of the State or his representative or the District Manager (Accounts, or Joint Manager (Accounts). Thereafter making necessary scrutiny in accordance with the terms and conditions, final list of prospective buyers was to be sent to the District Managers for executing the scheme.

The case of the prosecution is further that in the present case, in fact, Shri R.K. Ranga, who was the Senior Regional Manager of the FCI, did not adhere to the terms and conditions of the aforesaid scheme and the guidelines issued by the FCI; rather he sent telephonic messages to the staff posted at Headquarters of Rohtak for allotting a huge quantity of wheat to some particular persons without making any verification of their genuineness, and thereby cheated the Food Corporation of India as well as the public in general and small traders in connivance with Shri A.K. Sharma, who has also been labelled as coaccused. Shri A.K. Sharma is one of the partners in M/s Laxmi Engineering Works and Allied Industries (Dobh). Shri A.K. Sharma has also given in writing to the authorities on 13.11.1996 that the concern M/s Laxmi Engineering Works and Allied Industries was not functioning for the last 2/3 years. This application of Shri A.K. Sharma was also brought to the notice of Shri R.K. Ranga petitioner by the District Manager, Food Corporation of India, Rohtak, but still the concern was allotted 5,000 quintals of wheat on telephonic messages from Delhi at the rate of Rs. 490/ per quintal. This quantity of wheat was straightaway sold to Rajesh Kumar, who is also co accused at the rate of Rs. 545/ per quintal. Said Rajesh sold this wheat at Delhi at the rate of Rs. 631/ per quintal, whereas as per guidelines and the terms and conditions of the allotment, this wheat was supposed to be sold in the form of wheat products such as Atta, Suji and Maida. Similarly, another coaccused, namely, Daya Nand, was also favoured by Shri R.K. Ranga by accepting his application directly on 17.11.1996 in his office at Chandigarh, from where he allotted through telephonic message 2000 quintals of wheat. The aforesaid quantity of wheat was, in fact, lifted by another coaccused Rajesh vide release order No. 648. In this way many other instances had been collected by the prosecution against Shri R.K. Ranga.

In nutshell the allegations against the petitioner are that he along with the employees and traders had flouted the Open Market Scheme with such intention or knowledge that the wheat, which was supposed to be used by a domestic consumer, ultimately fell in the hands of those traders, who transported the same outside Rohtak for material gain and those traders ultimately sold the wheat in the black market.

Shri R.K. Ranga at the first instance filed an application under Section 438, Cr.P.C. in the High Court, which was disposed of by this Bench vide order dated 21.1.1997 holding that this Court would like to be enlightened with the views of the Court of Session at the first instance. Such applications in the opinion of this Court should invariably be filed in the Court of Session, although the High Court has the concurrent jurisdiction. The propriety demands that a person who wants to seek his anticipatory bail should at the first instance approach the Court of Session. In compliance to the directions of this Court, Shri R.K. Ranga moved the Court of Session and the learned Additional Sessions Judge vide order dated 28.1.1997 dismissed the application of the petitioner by stating as follows :

"8. Now adverting to the other offences punishable under Sections 420, 199, 200, 109 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code, it is apparent from the facts and circumstances as well as the documents, placed on the file that accusedapplicant R.K. Ranga, being a Senior Regional Manager of Haryana Regional Office at Chandigarh, was responsible for the implementation of Open Market Scheme (Domestic) (hereinafter referred to as the Scheme) of wheat issued by Govt. of India and Ministry of Food. For the implementation of the said Scheme, a proper procedure has been laid down regarding the advertisement in the national dailies for obtaining the applications from the traders, flour mill owners etc. and thereafter all the applications were to be scrutinised in view of the terms and conditions published in the newspapers. Then and then alone, a list of prospective buyers was to be prepared and signed by the members of the Committee consisting of accusedapplicant R.K. Ranga, Director Food and Supplies Department of State or his representatives and District Manager (Accounts) or Joint Manager (Accounts), but here in the instant case, only some telephonic messages are shown to have been received from accused applicant R.K. Ranga for the allotment of thousands of quintals of wheat to the various firms of traders and flour mill owners etc. without following any procedure, meant for the implementation of the said scheme.

From the statement of P.A. of accusedapplicant R.K. Ranga, recorded under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, it appears that some fax messages were also sent to him (R.K. Ranga) from his suboffice at Rohtak for sending the signed list for the allotment of wheat, but those fax messages were destroyed by accusedapplicant R.K. Ranga. Some other fax messages are also alleged to have been sent to the Regional Office from Rohtak for the confirmation of his (accusedapplicant R.K. Ranga''s) telephonic orders, but those too were allegedly destroyed by him (R.K. Ranga).

The other accusedapplicant A.K. Sharma, who is partner of M/s Laxmi Engineering Works and Allied Industries, Dobh, by giving false information and in connivance with accusedapplicant R.K. Ranga is alleged to have obtained 6,000 quintals of wheat for preparing wheat products in his industry, which was not in fact functional for the last 45 years. According to the allegations of the prosecution the aforesaid quantity of wheat was in fact lifted by other coaccused Rajesh (now confined in judicial lock up), who sold the same on the same day in Delhi in black market at the rate of Rs. 631/ per quintal, whereas the cost of the said wheat was Rs. 490/ per quintal. According to the scheme and the advertisement made in the newspapers, the said quantity of wheat could be sold only within the revenue tehsil, where the industry of the accused was situated. These are some of the instances of the malpractices committed by the accusedapplicants in connivance with each other, whereby public at large was cheated, inasmuch as the entire quota of wheat was in fact meant for being sold in retail directly to the consumers in order to check sale price of the wheat. The investigation of this case, where lacs of quintals of wheat are alleged to have been sold in the aforesaid manner to the various traders in contravention of the scheme is at initial stage. The documents containing false information and some fax messages alleged to have been received by accusedapplicant R.K. Ranga, besides many other important documents, the identity of which could not be revealed at this stage without hampering the investigation, are also to be recovered from the various places of the State of Haryana as well as Delhi.

It is well settled that the provisions of Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure are to be invoked sparingly and in exceptional circumstances which, to my mind, are lacking in the instant case. Hence, taking an overall view of the facts and circumstances as well as the documents placed on the file, and without commenting on the merits of this case, I do not find it a fit case for granting anticipatory bail to any of the accused applicants namely R.K. Ranga and A.K. Sharma. Therefore, both the applications are hereby dismissed."

The petitioner who obviously was not satisfied with the order dated 28.1.1997 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Rohtak, has filed the present petition seeking his anticipatory bail and this Court has disposed of this application at the motion stage itself.

Subsection (1) of the Section 438, Cr.P.C., lays down as under :

"When any person has reason to believe that he may be arrested on an accusation of having committed a nonbailable offence, he may apply to the High Court or the Court of Session for a direction under this section; and that Court may, if it thinks fit, direct that in the event of such arrest, he shall be released on bail."

The above provision has been incorporated in the Code of Criminal Procedure with a purpose which appears to be to secure that a person anticipating arrest is not obliged to go to jail till he is able to move the Court for being released on bail. Further one of the main purposes of the arrest of an individual is that the accused should be available to the investigating machinery for further investigation and also the purpose is that the trial should not be jeopardised and for this purpose restrictions on the movements of the accused are necessary.

Shri H.L. Sibal, Senior Advocate, appearing on behalf of Shri R.K. Ranga, has made efforts to secure anticipatory bail for his client mainly on the ground that it has even been conceded by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge on the representation of the learned Public Prosecutor that the provisions of the Prevention of Black Market and Maintenance of Supply JUDGMENT/Notification issued under the Essential Commodities Act are not attracted. The wheat which was supposed to be allotted was to be distributed after scrutiny by the Committee and that the petitioner had no role to play in his individual capacity and the main allegations against the petitioner that he destroyed some of the records and fax messages also are unfounded, and, therefore the petitioner is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail so that he may not suffer the botheration and agony of arrest, especially when the petitioner is an IAS Officer. Shri Sibal took pains in going through the order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge to convince this Court that there was no valid premise for the Court of Session for the rejection of the application for bail. The petitioner is not likely to flee from justice. He will cooperate with the Police Authorities in the investigation of the case and the case of the prosecution is more or less based on documentary evidence, and, therefore, the chances of tampering with the evidence of the prosecution do not arise.

What should be the considerations which should weigh upon the Courts while granting or refusing anticipatory bails ? These are as under :

(i) Nature and gravity of the circumstances in which the offence is committed;

(ii) The position and status of the accused with reference to the victim and the witnesses;

(iii) Likelihood of the accused fleeing from justice;

(iv) Repetition of offence.

(v) Jeopardising his own life being faced with the grim prospects of possible conviction in the case.

(vi) Tampering with witnesses.

(vii) The history of the cases as well as of the investigation and other relevant grounds which may apply to the facts and circumstances of a particular case.

It is also settled that the remedy of anticipatory bail is an extraordinary remedy provided in law and has to be resorted to only in exceptional cases and if special grounds are made out. Thus where there was no attempt to involve the applicant in a false case with a view to disgrace him or to malign him and his conduct does not inspire confidence and the investigation is in progress, it cannot be said that special grounds have been made out for the grant of anticipatory bail. If the offence is of a serious nature and no special circumstances have been indicated or found, it will be improper on the part of the Court of Session or by the High Court to grant anticipatory bail. The above principles of law have been taken note of while deciding this application.

Equally is the law that an anticipatory bail should not be refused merely because the prosecution claims that the accused is wanted in the Police custody for the purpose of investigation. The genuineness of the alleged need for Police Custody has to be examined and it must be balanced against the duty of the Courts to uphold the dignity of every man and vigilantly guard his right to liberty without jeopardising the State object of law and order. Further the person seeking anticipatory bail has to satisfy by making out a special case that the charges levelled against him are mala fide and stem from ulterior motives. Reverting to the allegations levelled against the petitioner, this Court is prima facie satisfied that those allegations are very serious in nature, clearly indicating that the petitioner, who is holding a public office in the capacity of Senior Regional Manager, colluded and connived with the staff and tried to create artificial scarcity by putting at naught the open market scheme and allotted wheat against the policy and flouting it in its spirit. The wheat was allotted to those favourites and even to those concerns who had closed their business for the last 2/3 years and still to oblige them, the petitioner allotted wheat which was supposed to be consumed in the domestic market in the shape of Atta, Suji and Maida. The wheat sold was transported outside Haryana. If there is a violation on the part of the traders in connivance with a senior officer like the petitioner, the motives and the objects can be well inferred because the offences of corruption are committed in secrecy and every author of the crime knows what prompted him for the commission of the said crime. The Investigating Officer can only draw inferences. No doubt the allegations of the complainant may not be directly attracting the provisions of Section 420, Indian Penal Code, visavis the petitioner, yet those allegations prima facie establish that unauthorised dealers were in a position to procure and manage the wheat which could possibly be got by them under the orders of the petitioner who inspite of the fact that he was enjoying a position of status, ignored all the relevant provisions of the scheme and got the courage of releasing the wheat so that it may be sold in the black market and in this manner the ordinary consumer has been deprived of his right of consumption of wheat products. Such offenders in the view of this Court should not get the benefit of bail under Section 438, Cr.P.C., specially when the investigation is in progress and the allegations of the prosecution are that the petitioner was responsible for destroying some of the evidence so that the truth may not come on the surface. The investigating agency must be given free hand to collect all such materials by interrogating the petitioner after taking him into custody.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon Joginder Kumar v. State of U.P. and others, JT 1994(3) SC 423, and submitted that it is the duty of the Courts to protect the persons from the oppression and abuse by police. The attention of this Court was particularly invited to para No. 23 of the said judgment in which some guidelines have been incorporated of the report of the National Police Commission. There is no dispute with the proposition which has been propounded by their Lordships of the Supreme Court. This Court has also admitted in the earlier portion of this judgment that denying a person of his liberty is a serious matter. This Court is also of the view that a person is not liable to be arrested merely on the suspicion of complicity in an offence. In the present case there is reasonable justification on the part of the Police Officers when they want to effect the arrest of the petitioner and in the opinion of this Court, the arrest of the petitioner is necessary and justified as there are serious allegations against him that with his active connivance, the wheat which was supposed to be consumed by the domestic consumers has gone to the unscrupulous traders, making them rich overnight. The petitioner could think beyond the nose that the policy of fair distribution of the wheat which was supposed to be consumed in the domestic market, should be implemented in its letter and spirit. The petitioner tried to disobey the wishes of the Government under the garb that he was also dutybound and responsible to his own superiors working in the Food Corporation of India. The case is not based on rumours. Substantive allegations have been levelled against the petitioner and the Police has to play its own role in the interrogation of the petitioner.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has also drawn the attention of this Court to a citation reported as Gudikanti Narasimhulu and others v. Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, AIR 1978 SC 429, in which the Hon''ble Supreme Court was pleased to lay down that bail is the rule and the jail is the exception. With this proposition of law enunciated by the Hon''ble Supreme Court, there possibly cannot be any dispute but the discretionary provisions of Section 438, Cr.P.C., cannot be interpreted in such a manner that when there are serious allegations against a person and that those allegations require threadbare investigation, such person is supposed to surrender himself before the Police, as per the requirements of Section 41 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

If the order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge is viewed in the above guidelines and the allegations of the prosecution, this Court does not find any infirmity in the same.

After considering all the pros and cons of this case, specially in the light of the allegations against the petitioner, this petition under Section 438, Cr.P.C., filed by Shri R.K. Ranga deserves to be dismissed and it is ordered accordingly.

Nothing stated above shall amount to an expression of my opinion on the merits of the case.