9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (11) TMI 1313X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s tenure as the Union Railway Minister from 21.06.1991 to 13.10.1995. Commission of the offence under the aforesaid provision of the Act was alleged on the basis that the Appellant had dishonestly made the Managing Directors of RITES (Rail India Technical & Economics Services Ltd.) and IRCON (Indian Railway Construction Company Ltd.) to approve the journeys of S/Shri B.N. Nagesh, the then Additional PS to Railway Minister, S.M. Mastan and Murlidharan, Stenographers in the railway cell and one Shri Samaullah (domestic help of the Appellant) to London in connection with the medical treatment of the Appellant. It was alleged in the FIR that the two Public Sector Undertakings did not have any pending business in London at the relevant point of time and the journeys undertaken by the aforesaid four persons were solely at the behest of the Appellant who had compelled the services of the concerned employees to be placed in the two undertakings in question. Pecuniary loss to the Public Sector Undertakings was, therefore, caused by the wrongful acts of the Appellant. 4. On the basis of the aforesaid FIR, Case No. RC. 2(A)/98-ACU. IX was registered and investigated upon. Final report of suc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... counsel for the Appellant has submitted that he would not assail the impugned order of the High Court on the ground of absence of requisite sanction either under the provisions of the Act or under the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure Shri Rao has submitted that the aforesaid issue need not be gone into in the present appeal in as much as the allegations made in the FIR and facts appearing from the reports of the investigating agency, ex facie, do not make out the commission of any offence by accused-appellant under Section 13(1)(d) of the Act so as to warrant the continuance of the prosecution against him. Drawing the attention of the court to the consideration of the statements of the witnesses, examined in the course of investigation, by the High Court, particularly, Shri B.N. Nagesh (PW 33), Shri Murlidharan (PW 34) and Shri S.M. Mastan it is contended that from the statements of the aforesaid persons it is crystal clear that while in London the persons accompanying the Appellant had performed various official duties. It is submitted that the accused- Appellant, while undergoing medical treatment in London, did not cease to be the Railway Minister and during the per ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... conclusively prove that the offence as alleged has not been committed by the accused-appellant. The matter has to be determined in the course of the trial which may be permitted to commence and be brought to its logical conclusion. 12. At the very outset we wish to make it clear that we do not agree with the contention advanced by the learned ASG to the effect that the only issue raised by the Appellant before the High Court was with regard to the absence of sanction for the impugned prosecution. While the above may have the complexion of the proceeding before the learned trial court, in the application filed by the accused- Appellant before the High Court the validity of the continuance of the criminal proceeding as a whole was called into question, inter-alia, on the ground that ex-facie the ingredients of the offence under Section 13 (1)(d) are not made out on the allegations levelled. We have already noticed that before the High Court two reliefs had been prayed for by the Appellant, namely, interference with the order of the learned trial court dated 27.01.2010 as well as for quashing of the criminal proceeding. In view of the aforesaid position demonstrated by the relevant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and caused pecuniary loss to the two Public Sector Undertakings by arranging the visits of the four persons in question to London without any public interest. This, in essence, is the case against the accused-appellant. 16. A fundamental principle of criminal jurisprudence with regard to the liability of an accused which may have application to the present case is to be found in the work "Criminal Law" by K.D. Gaur. The relevant passage from the above work may be extracted below: Criminal guilt would attach to a man for violations of criminal law. However, the rule is not absolute and is subject to limitations indicated in the Latin maxim, actus non facit reum, nisi mens sit rea. It signifies that their can be no crime without a guilty mind. To make a person criminally accountable it must be proved that an act, which is forbidden by law, has been caused by his conduct, and that the conduct was accompanied by a legally blameworthy attitude of mind. Thus, there are two components of every crime, a physical element and a mental element, usually called actus reus and mens rea respectively. 17. It has already been noticed that the Appellant besides working as the Minister of Railwa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
