Police closure report challenged over 'jurisdictional flaws'
Panchkula, Nov. 21 -- The cancellation report filed by Haryana police in an FIR against retired IAS officer Ashok Khemka and others has been challenged in a local court by high court advocate and whistleblower Ravinder Kumar.
The case was scheduled for consideration on November 17 before the court of chief judicial magistrate (CJM) Aparna Bhardwaj. However, Ravinder filed an application requesting the court to transfer the case to a competent court possessing exclusive jurisdiction. Ravinder, is also an accused in the FIR No. 171 registered in April 2022 at Panchkula on the complaint of Khemka. This was a counter-FIR - registered the same day the police registered the one against Khemka.
The CJM court subsequently adjourned the matter, listing it for February 6 for filing reply to the application.
The FIR, lodged on April 26, 2022, by the Haryana State Warehousing Corporation (HSWC) through its then-secretary Vaneet Chawla (since retired), was registered at Sector-5 police station against Ashok Khemka and others. They were booked under Section 13 of the Prevention of Corruption (PC) Act and Section 420 of IPC. Complainant Ravinder is also an accused in a counter-FIR No. 171 filed by Khemka on the same day in April 2022.
The complaint against Khemka revolves around the alleged multiple illegal appointments made to the post of Manager Grade-I in the HSWC in 2010, which reportedly violated mandatory provisions of an advertisement published in 2009. An initial inquiry by a committee of senior HSWC officers was conducted after a legal notice from Ravinder. The police later filed an Untrace Closure Report (UCR) this year, seeking closure of the case.
Ravinder's application contests the closure report, arguing that the police's attempt to close the case was based solely on the lack of sanction under Section 17A of the PC Act.
He alleged that the ACP-rank IO intentionally failed to fully investigate, asserting that permission under Section 17A was not necessary because the offence was ex-facie criminal, a position supported by various HC and Supreme Court rulings....
To read the full article or to get the complete feed from this publication, please
Contact Us.