Patna High Court Refuses To Quash FIR Against IPS Amit Lodha In Disproportionate Asset Case, Directs State To Conclude Investigation In 6 Months

While rejecting Bihar Cadre Indian Police Service (IPS) officer Amit Lodha's plea to quash the first information report (FIR) related to a Disproportionate Asset (DA) case lodged against him by the Special Vigilance Unit (SVU), the Patna High Court has directed the SVU to take the investigation of this case to its logical end within six monthsLodha, a 1998 batch IPS officer, currently posted as the Inspector General, State Crime Records Bureau, Bihar, Patna, had in December, 2022 filed a criminal writ petition before the court to quash the FIR lodged against him on December 7, 2022.Justice Rajeev Ranjan Prasad observed, “In the present case, as per the allegations and the evidences which have been collected so far, it is contended that the petitioner has accumulated assets valued more than 7 crores even as his total income from all legal sources would not be more than 2 crores in gross without any deductions. The investigation of the case is still pending and the SVU has come out with a statement in its report that the investigation will take at least six more months.”“In the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court finds no merit in this writ application. No interference is required by this Court to scuttle the investigation of the case,” Justice Prasad added. The plea was filed by Lodha seeking to quash the F.I.R. of Special Vigilance Unit, Patna dated 07.12.2022 filed under sections 13(1)(b) read with 13(2) read with Section 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and Sections 120(B) and 168 of the Indian Penal Code in the facts and circumstances of the case. Lodha also sought quashing and setting aside the investigation being done by the respondent authorities in relation to the aforesaid F.I.R. which was 'illegal, erroneous and malafidely instituted.'Lodha had filed the writ petition on the following three grounds :(i) The allegations set out do not constitute commission of any cognizable offence by the petitioner;(ii) The FIR and the entire criminal proceedings arising therefrom, including its investigation, is vitiated with malafide and will result in malicious prosecution, if allowed to continue and;(iii) The impugned FIR has been registered without obtaining mandatory sanction under Section 17A of the P.C. Act.Having heard the senior counsel for the petitioner and the counsel for the SVU and upon perusal of the records, the Court observed that the information which was part of the FIR, in this case, would demonstrate that the allegation against the petitioner is that of illicitly acquiring wealth as a public servant. The Court pointed out that it has been alleged that there were regular transactions' of money from the account of Friday Story Tellers to the account of Komudi Lodha, the wife of the petitioner on different dates related to the production of a film and the ultimate beneficiary of the same was this petitioner, his wife and his associates. “The allegations are being investigated. The allegations, without adding or subtracting anything out of it, if taken on as it is, it cannot be said that no cognizable offence would be made out,” the Court asserted.The Court further asserted, “At this stage, this Court is of the considered opinion that the contention of the SVU that the scrutiny of available government records available in public domain reveal that the accused has acquired huge movable/immovable properties which is over and above and have been illicitly acquired, cannot be examined by this Court by holding a pre- matured trial.”The Court pointed out that there is another allegation that the petitioner being a public servant had illegally entered into a private trade with a production house and earned around Rs. 49,62,372/-by corrupt and illegal means. “At this stage, this Court is of the considered opinion that the contention of the SVU that the scrutiny of available government records available in public domain reveal that the accused has acquired huge movable/immovable properties which is over and above and have been illicitly acquired, cannot be examined by this Court by holding a pre- matured trial,” the Court remarked.While arguing the plea, the senior counsel for the petitioner had attempted to furnish a lot of explanations and justifications behind the alleged transactions with Friday Story Teller LLP, however, the Court opined that such explanations and justifications are not to be considered by this Court at this stage. The Court emphasized that the case is still at the investigation stage and the SVU in its report submitted before this Court has stated that in order to arrive at a logical conclusion in this case at least six more months is needed. The Court was not impressed by the submission of the senior counsel for the petitioner that lodging the FIR in the present case without going for a preliminary inquiry was a mala fide action. It stressed, “it is well settled that if the source informations are credible and those indicate towards commission of a cognizable ...

Patna High Court Refuses To Quash FIR Against IPS Amit Lodha In Disproportionate Asset Case, Directs State To Conclude Investigation In 6 Months

Bhavya Singh

Tags