E-Paper
Missing foodgrain: Punjab and Haryana HC dismisses anticipatory bail pleas of 3 Pungrain inspectors
The Punjab and Haryana high court has dismissed anticipatory bail pleas of three Punjab Grains Procurement Corporation Limited inspectors booked by Punjab Police in a case of missing foodgrain in Ferozepur district.
Chandigarh
The Punjab and Haryana high court has dismissed anticipatory bail pleas of three Punjab Grains Procurement Corporation Limited (Pungrain) inspectors booked by Punjab Police in a case of missing foodgrain in Ferozepur district.
The high court bench of justice Gurvinder Singh Gill dismissed the plea observing that the report of a committee clearly indicated shortage of wheat in centres where the inspectors were posted. “Hence, their custodial interrogation would certainly be required to unearth all the finer details of the modus operandi,” he said.
The plea was filed by three inspectors, Baj Chand, Gulab Singh and Hans Raj Singh, deputed at godowns of Pungrain, named in an FIR registered in Ferozepur in August 2022 under the Prevention of Corruption Act.
It was alleged that shortage of wheat was found in various godowns in the district. The three inspectors were among others responsible for the upkeep and storage of the wheat. Initially, shortage of 650 bags weighing 310 quintals was found but after verification, additional shortage 788 bags weighing 50 kilograms each was also found in a dozen-odd godowns.
The inspectors argued that the entire proceedings right from lodging of the FIR and the investigation thereafter are illegal as no sanction in terms of Section 17-A of the Prevention of Corruption Act had been obtained before initiation of any inquiry/investigation.
The court, however, observed that all offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act would not require sanction as Section 17-A of the Act and the touchstone is as to whether such act was committed in discharge of official duties or not.
“Certainly, embezzlement of huge stock of wheat as against the record maintained by the accused cannot be said to be a part of the official duty and nor any such embezzlement can be said to be a part of any decision-making or recommendations made by a public servant,” the court said dismissing the pleas.
