Summary
A Metropolitan Transport Corporation employee complained that Rs. 40 lakh collected from job aspirants had been paid at the then Tamil Nadu Transport Minister's residence to his associate, against assurances of appointment as drivers and conductors. The final report charged the Minister, his brother, the associate and another under Sections 406, 409, 420 and 506(1) IPC, omitting the Prevention of Corruption Act. On a compromise with the 13 victims, the Madras High Court quashed the case under Section 482 CrPC. The Supreme Court allowed appeals by an unselected candidate and an anti-corruption body and restored the complaint. Candidates edged out by a cash-for-jobs scam are victims with locus. Section 409 is non-compoundable, and corruption by public servants, an offence against society, cannot be ended by refund-based settlement. A further report under Section 173(8) was directed.
Issues
- Whether an unselected candidate and an anti-corruption organisation have locus standi to challenge the quashing of a cash-for-jobs prosecution
- Whether criminal proceedings involving allegations of corrupt practices in public employment, including a non-compoundable offence, can be quashed under Section 482 CrPC on a compromise with the persons who paid money
- What directions should follow from the omission of offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act from the final report
Provisions considered
- Section 482, read with Sections 320(9), 2(wa) and 372 proviso, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973Section 409 IPC is non-compoundable, and quashing on settlement is impermissible where the offence affects society. 'Victim' now includes those who suffered loss from the alleged acts, which covers meritorious candidates edged out of selection. (¶¶ 23, 31, 32, 37, 41, 42, 44)
- Sections 173(8) and 216, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973The investigating officer was to file a further report in light of the omitted offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act, and failing that the Special Court may alter or add charges. (¶¶ 45, 50)
- Sections 406, 409, 420 and 506(1), Indian Penal Code, 1860These were the offences in the final report. Only Section 506 was compoundable without leave, Sections 406 and 420 only with the court's permission, and Section 409 not at all. (¶¶ 30, 31, 32)
Held
- Persons who took part in the selection but were edged out by candidates who allegedly paid for appointment are victims, and the public served by such appointees is indirectly affected. The objection to locus therefore fails. Sanjay Tiwari and Janata Dal, involving strangers to the proceedings, are distinguishable, and P.S.R. Sadhanantham and the 2009 amendment defining 'victim' support access. (¶¶ 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24)
- Under Gian Singh, Vikram Anantrai Doshi and Parbatbhai Aahir, proceedings may be quashed on settlement only where the dispute is predominantly civil or private. Offences under special statutes such as the PC Act, offences by public servants in that capacity, and economic offences affecting society cannot be ended by compromise. (¶¶ 33, 37, 40, 41, 42)
- Allowing those who paid but were not appointed to settle by taking refunds would put a seal of approval on the appointments of those who paid and were appointed. Corruption by a public servant is an offence against the State and society and cannot be treated like a suit for specific performance. The High Court erred in quashing the complaint. (¶¶ 43, 44)
- Even a novice would not have omitted the PC Act offences given the investigating officer's own account of the modus operandi. The plea that the associate was not the Minister's personal assistant was contradicted by that account. The State should investigate the whole scam comprehensively and seek vacation of stays in the related PC Act cases. (¶¶ 45, 46, 47, 48)
Result
Appeals allowed. The quashing order was set aside and the complaint restored. The investigating officer was to file a further report under Section 173(8), with the Special Court free to act under Section 216, and the State was to seek vacation of stays in the related cases. Prayers for an SIT or a special prosecutor were left undecided.