STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH versus RAKESH MISHRA

Citation: [2015] 3 S.C.R. 765 · Decided: 23-03-2015 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 1 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

[2015] 3 S.C.R. 765 
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH 
A 
v. 
RAKESH MISHRA 
(Criminal Appeal No. 498 of 2015 etc.) 
MARCH 23, 2015. 
B 
[PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE AND R.K. AGRAWAL, JJ.] 
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973- s.397 rlw s.401 - c 
Criminal Revision - Against the framing of charges ulss. 
13(2) and 13(1 )(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act rlw s. 1208 
/PC- Order of framing of charges set aside by High Court-
He/d: There is sufficient material to make out - prima facie 
case against the accused persons - Prevention of Corruption D 
Act, 1988- ss.13(2) and 13(1)(d) - Penal Code, 1860 - s. 
1208. 
Delay - In disposed of cases - Held: Delay in justice 
delivery system not only renders justice ineffective, but also E 
leads to erosion of evidence. 
Allowing the appeals, the Court 
HELD: 1. Only charge-sheet along with the F 
accompanying material is to be considered at the stage 
of framing of charges, so as to satisfy whether a prima 
facie case is made out. It has to be the subjective 
satisfaction of the Court framing charges. In the present 
case, the High Court has only examined the material G 
before it against the prevailing law to reach its 
conclusions. [Para 7] [770-D-E] 
2. The revised building plan, which was sanctioned 
in the guise of the revision of sanction of th~ building H 
765 
766 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2015] 3 S.C.R. 
A permission, was a complete departure from the original 
plan. When such major changes are made to the plan, 
the approvals for fire safety devices, electricity, water 
supply and sewage, granted as per original plan would 
become irrelevant. Also, the completion certificate was 
B merely 7 days after the revision of building permission. 
Although, the completion certificate was only in relation 
to the Club and not the Hotel, yet it is difficult to fathom 
as to how even a Club could be completely built, with all 
C compliances within 7 days of building permission, 
especially when the revised building plan consisted 
major changes from initial plan. Further, the accused not 
only granted the revision without approval of any 
committee, but also accepted the honorary membership 
D of the Club. Thus, there exists sufficient material to make 
out a prima facie case againstthe accused. [Paras 10, 11 
and 13] [771-8-C, E-H; 772-C] 
3. Such extended litigation at the pre-trial stage itself, 
E is disappointing. The delay in justice delivery system not 
only renders justice ineffective but also ill-founded as it 
leads to erosion of evidence. [Para 14] [772-D-E] 
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Criminal 
F Appeal No. 498 of 2015 etc. 
G 
From the Judgment and Order dated 18.05.2007 of the 
High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Indore in Criminal Revision 
No. 636 of 2007. 
WITH 
Criminal Appeal No. 499 of2015. 
Arvind Varma, Deepika Shari, C. D. Singh for the 
H Appellant. 
STATE OF M. P. v. RAKESH MISHRA 
767 
Sum it kumar Sharma, Niraj Sharma, Brajesh Kumar for A 
the Respondent. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE, J. 1. Leave granted in both B 
the matters. 
2. These appeals arise out of the judgment and order 
dated 18th May, 2007 passed by the High Court of Madhya 
Pradesh (Indore Bench), disposing of Criminal Revision C 
Petition Nos.636/2007, 610/2007 and 566/2007 which were 
filed under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Code of 
Criminal Procedure, 1973. By the impugnedjudgmentthe High 
Court of Madhya Pradesh has allowed the three revision 
petitions, setting aside the orders of the FirstAdditional Judge/ o 
Special Judge, Indore, for framing charges against three 
accused persons, namely, Rakesh Mishra, Gyanendra Singh 
Jadon and Sajid Dhanani. It may be noted that the State has 
assailed the impugned judgment only against Rakesh Mishra 
and GS. Jadon. 
E 
3. The brief facts of the case are that Sajid Dhanani is the 
Managing Director of the Sayaji Hotel situated at Scheme 
No.54, Near Meghdut Gardan, Vijay Nagar, Indore. Gyanendra 
Singh Jadon was working at the relevant time as Building 
F 
Officer posted at Municipal Corporation, Indore and Rakesh 
Mishra was working as Sub-Engineer, Municipal Corporation, 
Indore. It is alleged that these three accused hatched a criminal 
conspiracy in which G.S. Jadon and Rakesh Mishra illegally 
granted a Building Certificate and a Completion Certificate to G 
Sayaji Hotel in Indore. Allegedly, as illegal gratification, Sayaji 
Hotel provided free lifetime honorary membership to G.S. 
Jadon and his family mem

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.