Custody Needed To Unravel Corruption Racket In Jail: P&H HC Denies Pre-Arrest Bail To Official Booked For Supplying Mobile Phones To Gangsters

The Punjab & Haryana High Court has refused to grant anticipatory bail to a Jail Superintendent accused of collecting bribe from gangsters to supply them mobile phones inside the Haryana's Kurukshetra prison and allowed visits of hard core criminal without entry in register. It was alleged that the imprisoned gangsters and hard core criminals hatched Conspiracy to manufacture illicit liquor.

The Court rejected the plea that investigation against the Jail Superintendent was lodged without following the provision of Section 17-A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, as the police officers were not empowered to conduct investigation offence alleged to have been committed by a public servant under the PC Act, without the prior approval, if the alleged offence relate to any recommendations made or decision taken by a public servant in discharge of official functions.

Justice N.S. Shekhawat said, "The Section 17-A of the PC Act was aimed at protecting the honest and upright officers and were not intended to save and protect the public servants, who are accused of hatching a conspiracy with notorious criminals/gangsters/illicit liquor traders lodged in jail."

The Court noted that In the present case, the petitioner is facing serious charges of allowing a gangster Shamsher Singh @ Monu Rana to use mobile phone and to meet other hardened criminals, who were successful in manufacturing spurious liquor, causing death of 20 innocent persons and leaving many seriously ill.

It added that "the incident had shattered the families of the deceased, causing them irreparable loss for their entire life due to consumption of spurious liquor by them."

The judge also agreed with the State counsel that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner would be eminently required to unravel the role, viz-a-viz, the modus operandi adopted, collection of illegal gratification, his association with other jail staff as well as senior official of Haryana Prison's Department.

The Court was hearing pre-arrest bail of Som Nath Jagat who was posted at Jail Superintendent in Kurukshetra district jail. The FIR was lodged against Jagat under Sections 7 and 8 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Section 42 of the Prisons Act, 1894 and Section 120-B of IPC.

Senior Counsel for petitioner argued that in the present case, the mandatory provisions of Section 17-A of the PC Act were not followed as the police officers were not empowered to conduct an enquiry or inquiry or investigation in any offence alleged to have been committed by a public servant under the PC Act, without the prior approval, if the alleged offence relate to any recommendations made or decision taken by a public servant in discharge of official functions or duties.

After hearing the submissions, the Court rejected the arguments raised by the petitioner and noted that  the object of inserting Section 17-A in the PC Act was to protect honest public servant from the harassment by way of inquiry or investigation in respect of decisions taken or acts done in bonafide purpose of their official functions or duties.

Justice Shekhawat highlighted that during the course of investigation, the statements of several jail officials/other witnesses have been recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. as well as Section 161 Cr.P.C. and  the police has been able to gather sufficient evidence against Jagat.

The Court said that custodial interrogation will be required to know the entire racket prevalent inside the District Jail, Kurukshetra and the negotiations between the criminals and the jail officials.

It also noted that Jagat did not join the investigation and fabricated a medical certificate allegedly issued by Shri Balaji Aroyagam Hospital, Private Limited, Kurukshetra.

"Thus, his misconduct disentitled him to the discretionary relief of anticipatory bail and the petition deserves to be dismissed by this Court," added the Court.

Dr. Anmol Rattan Sidhu, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Supriya Arora, Advocate for the applicant/petitioner.

Ms. Sheenu Sura, DAG, Haryana.

Title: Som Nath Jagat v. State of Haryana

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 355

Click here to read/download the order