HC gives clean chit to former Haryana CM Bhupinder Hooda in National Herald’s Panchkula case

The Punjab and Haryana High Court on Wednesday set aside criminal charges against Associated Journals Limited (AJL) and former Haryana Chief Minister Bhupinder Singh Hooda in a case related to irregularities in the re-allotment of an institutional plot to the company in Panchkula. CBI charge sheeted only Hooda and AJL’s managing director, Motilal Vora.

Justice Tribhuvan Dahiya said that Hooda’s 2005 decision to re-allot the plot, which had originally been given to AJL in 1982 for the establishment of the office of National Herald and publication of a Hindi newspaper, was unanimously ratified by the Haryana Urban Development Authority (HUDA) ex-post facto in 2006. It added that no court has declared the decision illegal till date.

“The allotment is valid as on date, it has also not been cancelled, nor declared illegal or arbitrary. Instead, the AJL, after payment of the re-allotment price as well as the extension fee, has raised construction, and has been given an occupation certificate by the Authority on August 14, 2014. No grievance has been raised regarding any loss to the Authority; nor has the AJL or any other accused been called upon to make good any perceived harm. Even the Government auditors have dropped their objection regarding financial loss to the Authority on account of this re-allotment,” the Court said.

The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) had earlier filed a chargesheet under the Prevention of Corruption (PC) Act against the AJL, Hooda — who was the Chairman of HUDA, and Congress leader and former Madhya Pradesh Chief Minister Moti Lal Vora, who has since passed away. Subsequently, the trial court framed charges against AJL and Hooda in 2021. AJL’s major shareholders Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi, having 76 percent shares in AJL was not made part of the case by CBI. Meanwhile, ED has attached the Panchkula building in the main case.

The case was initially registered in 2016 by the Haryana Vigilance Bureau. A Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) Government later transferred the probe to the CBI. It was alleged that the plot was re-allotted to AJL at 1982 rates despite the cancellation of the original allotment. However, the High Court opined that the material brought on record by CBI does not even prima facie disclose the existence of essential ingredients of the alleged offences against them.

“Continuation of prosecution will be an abuse of the process of the Court. Consequently, both the petitions are allowed. The impugned orders, dated

April 16, 2021, framing charges against the petitioners as well as dismissing the discharge application, are hereby set aside along with all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, and the petitioners stand discharged,” the Court ordered. The Court said Hooda’s decision had not been questioned by anyone, including the State government and HUDA. Even the FIR was registered on the basis of a source, it added.

“Ignoring these vital facts of the matter, the CBI has taken upon itself to term the re-allotment illegal, being violative of the 1977 Act, which would in its view, attract criminal liability under the provisions of the IPC and the PC Act invoked against the petitioners. It is unfathomable as to how the investigating agency can consider the reallocation of the plot unlawful on its own, and proceed to register a criminal case on the basis. This is absolutely illegal, and far from any procedure known to law,” the Bench said.

“Although there has been a request from the AJL seeking restoration of the plot to it, there is no material forthcoming to indicate that it was in concurrence with BSH [Hooda] to fraudulently or dishonestly get the plot restored at original rates,” said the court.

The Court also found there to be no evidence of AJL asking the reallocation of the plot at a particular price.

The Court noted that the initial allotment to the AJL was at ‘no profit no loss’ basis at the rate of Rs 91 per square yard and the objection regarding loss of money to HUDA was dropped by the Deputy Accountant General in 2009. Therefore, the Court said that there was no material indicating any loss to HUDA, adding that there wasn’t even an assessment in this regard.

“Merely because statements of some officers of the Authority or Government have been recorded to the effect that reallocation of the plot at current rates would have fetched more money to the Authority, it cannot form a basis to contend that any loss has actually been caused. The statements are without any factual basis. To claim on this premise that the re-allotment caused any loss to the Authority is fictional, which cannot afford any ground to frame a charge for commission of the alleged offences,” the Court added.