No infirmity in Special Court orders in Manesar land case, says High Court

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has turned down the petitions filed by former bureaucrats and others accused in the Manesar land case, upholding the Special Court’s decision to dismiss their discharge applications and instead proceed with frame charges under provisions of the Indian Penal Code and the Prevention of Corruption Act. The court held that no sanction for prosecution was required in the circumstances of the case.

The petitioners included former Principal Secretaries to then Chief Minister Murari Lal Tayal and Chhatar Singh; former Director, Town and Country Planning Department, Sudeep Singh Dhillon; and others, including private builders. They had approached the High Court challenging the December 1, 2020, order of the Special Court, which had dismissed their discharge applications and proceeded to frame charges.

Justice Manjari Nehru Kaul ruled that sanction under Section 19 of the PC Act was not required for prosecuting the petitioners, as they had already retired from service at the time the police report was submitted and cognizance was taken on March 16, 2018. The court noted that the legal position settled prior to the 2018 amendment to the PC Act—applicable at the relevant time—was that no sanction under Section 19 of the PC Act was required for prosecuting retired public servants.

Justice Kaul also rejected the argument that the absence of prior sanction under Section 197 CrPC barred the Special Court from taking cognizance of the alleged offences. It held that sanction under Section 197 CrPC was not a prerequisite for prosecuting offences under Sections 420 (cheating) and 120-B (criminal conspiracy) IPC. Relying on the Supreme Court’s judgment, the court asserted: “This Court finds no illegality in the decision of the Special Court to proceed without sanction under Section 197 of the CrPC, for the offences under Section 420 (cheating) and 120-B (criminal conspiracy) of the IPC”.

Before parting with the order, the Bench observed: “This court finds no infirmity, legal or procedural, in the impugned order passed by the learned Special Court. The impugned order has been rendered in accordance with settled legal principles and does not warrant interference. Consequently, all the petitions stand dismissed.”

The Bench during the course of hearing was told that certain private builders and dealers purchased land from farmers at meagre prices under the threat of acquisition by the government subsequent to the issuance of a notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. They applied for licences or CLU in the DTCP, while the notification of land acquisition was subsisting and the award was yet to be announced. The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has alleged that, despite the ineligibility of the builders and the land being under acquisition, officials of the DTCP, in collusion with the builders, kept their applications pending.

“Concurrently, officials of the Department of Industries, HSIIDC, and the then CM, along with his Principal Secretary, allegedly permitted the notification for land acquisition to lapse by deferring the announcement of the award…. Once the acquisition lapsed, the officials of the DTCP processed the applications, which were kept pending by them, and allegedly granted licences to the builders/dealers in a hurried manner, despite their ineligibility as per rules,” the CBI further alleged.

Haryana Tribune