Writ Petition No. 5243(W) Of 2016
High Court of Judicature At Calcutta
BENCH: Hon’ble Nishita Mhatre AC J., Hon’ble Tapabrata Chakraborty J.
DATE OF JUDGEMENT: 17-03-2017
BRANCH OF FORENSIC SCIENCE: Voice Analysis (Forensic Physics)
RELEVANT SECTIONS/ACTS:
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988
- Sections 7 – Public servant taking gratification other than legal remuneration in respect of an official act.
- Sections 12 – Punishment for abetment of offences defined in section 7 or 11.
- Sections 13(1) (d) – Criminal misconduct by a public servant.
(d) If he—
(i) By corrupt or illegal means, obtains for himself or for any other person any valuable thing or pecuniary advantage; or
(ii) By abusing his position as a public servant, obtains for himself or for any other person any valuable thing or pecuniary advantage.
(iii) While holding office as a public servant, obtains for any person any valuable thing or pecuniary advantage without any public interest.
- Section 13(2) – Any public servant who commits criminal misconduct shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall be not less than one year but which may extend to seven years and shall also be liable to fine.
BACK STORY
The Petitioners have pleaded that on 14th March 2016 they watched a news telecast in which the Respondents Nos.11 to 22 (hereinafter referred to as “Respondents”) were receiving illegal gratification for promising and assuring a representative of an unknown company to assist it in improving its business, using their positions and the high offices they occupied. According to the Petitioners, they noticed these audio-visuals on all news channels in the electronic media, which proclaimed them as a part of a “sting operation” conducted by Respondent No.10. The Petitioners claimed that this news was published in the print media on the next day, that is, on 15th March 2016. They have further mentioned that Respondent Nos.11 to 21, who are all members of the All India Trinamul Congress (hereinafter referred to as “TMC”) and are either Ministers of the Government of West Bengal or Members of Parliament or the State Legislature and Respondent 22, Commandant, Special Striking Force, Barrackpore, an officer of the West Bengal Police, had indulged in criminal activities “to cheat the faith of public and commit criminal breach of trust in respect of public money and thus misappropriated huge amount in utter breach of trust, faith and confidence reposed upon them causing wrongful gain to themselves and wrongful loss to the public”. The Petitioners have stated that they filed a complaint in the Shyampukur Police Station, Kolkata on 15th March 2016. They then submitted the complaint by mail to the Central Bureau of Investigation (hereinafter referred to as “CBI”) and Enforcement Directorate (hereafter referred to as “ED”), so that appropriate steps could be taken against the Respondent Nos.11 to 22 in accordance with the law. According to the Petitioners, the State Police would not investigate the alleged offences impartially because of the extraneous influence which could be exerted on them. The Petitioners contended that the Respondents have committed offences punishable under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 besides offences under the Indian Penal Code and other similar statues. The Petitioners have prayed that the Court should direct the CBI and the ED to investigate the activities of Respondent Nos.11 to 22 which were telecast on the news channels on 14th March 2016. They have also prayed that Respondent Nos.11 to 21 should prohibit from contesting the West Bengal Assembly Elections of 2016 as candidates of the TMC without their names cleared by the investigating agencies. The writ petitions have been filed on 16th March 2016.
VOICE IDENTIFICATION REPORT
Forensic examination no tampering/editing has been found in the video uploaded in the print media. The exhibits analyzed contain audio conversations of about 428 minutes (approximately 7 hours). The said transcript of the disputed conversation is an identification data which in course of inquiry can compare with the voice sample of the accused persons.
The collection of such a voice sample of inculpatory material for spectrographic examination is neither unreasonable nor unfair and it does not constitute a violation of any fundamental right.
JUDGEMENT
It is said by the court “Corruption is a reprehensible crime in a society and it is an assault on the faith of the common people upon officers and Ministers and people’s representatives. It defiles and degrades and shakes the confidence of the people at large upon the Government. It causes psychological harm to the society at large leaving upon it indelible marks.
After pronouncing the judgment in open Court, the learned Advocates appearing respectively on behalf of the State, the Respondent Nos.12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, and 22 have prayed for stay of the same.