H.C.S Yadav v. The State
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
[ CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR ] ...
CRR/34/2024 Shri H.C.S. Yadav ...Petitioner Vs.
The State ... Respondent Mrs. Anjili Nag ... for the Petitioner Ms. A.S. Zinu ...for the Respondent April 12, 2024 [M.A.Mobin] Item No.3 1.
Both the Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the parties to this Revisional application are present.
2.
Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that one of the accused viz. A. Selvam preferred Revisional application being CRR/27/2023 before this Court and Hon'ble Justice Tirthankar Ghosh returned his finding as follows:- "None of the documents under Section 207 of the Cr.P.C has been enclosed along with the present revisional application, and I find that thirteen persons have been implicated in this case, who either belong to the purchase committee or the procurement section. The tender was called by the Purchase committee, as such, if after the tender was floated and a particular company/bidder was allotted the tender in that case whether the procurement department had any role to play or not in respect of the price which is the subject matter of consideration, was not brought to the notice of the learned Court while the application was moved on behalf of the state.
State is directed to present the relevant documents and or supply the same if not already supplied to the learned advocate appearing on behalf of the accused/petitioner. At this stage of consideration of charges it is the duty of the court to see whether there is some suspicion or grave suspicion and as to whether a bridge was established between the two different departments, that is procurement department and
purchase department in respect of the price component, for establishing a conspiracy for implicating the petitioner." 3.
It is further submitted that the issue raised in this Revisional application also identical to the issue which was disposed of by the Hon'ble Justice Tirthankar Ghosh who remanded the matter giving an opportunity to file document before the Trial Court for adjudication of the issue afresh.
4.
Mrs. Nag, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner, has submitted that the role of the petitioner was specifically contended before the Trial Court, but that was not dealt with in course of passing order of refusal dated 14.11.2023. 5.
In the aforesaid view of the matter, I also find it justified to remand the matter again before the learned Trial Judge for rehearing the petitioner as well as the State in respect of specific role played by the petitioner in the alleged tender and disbursement of excess amount of the market price at the relevant point of time. 6.
Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has further submitted that the order dated 14.11.2023 has already been set aside by this Court in disposing the Civil Revisional application being No.16 of 2024, 20 of 2024 and 32 of 2024 on April 04, 2024.
7.
Accordingly, the matter has been remanded to the learned Trial Judge for re-hearing the application filed on behalf of the petitioner after giving an opportunity of hearing and also to consider the documents to be filed on behalf of the State.
8.
However, Learned Trial Judge shall not be influenced, in any manner, by the observation of this Court given in course of disposing of the instant application.
9.
Learned Special Judge is requested to dispose of the petition preferably within six months from date.
10.
With the aforesaid observation, the Revisional application stands disposed of.
11.
Parties to act on a server copy of this order duly collected from the official website of the Hon'ble High Court at Calcutta. [Bibhas Ranjan De, J.]