In Brief
A Mining Engineer was charged with criminal misconduct under the Prevention of Corruption Act for allegedly facilitating unauthorised mining by issuing a technical map showing 80,000 Sq. Ft. when only 52,272 Sq. Ft. was allotted, thereby causing loss to the Government and hindering another person's quarry licence. The High Court quashed the charges. The Supreme Court held that at the charge-framing stage, only strong suspicion of guilt is required, not proof. The Court restored the charges, ruling the High Court erred in quashing them without examining the substance of allegations. Revisional jurisdiction for quashing charges must be exercised sparingly and only in rare cases where allegations are patently absurd or basic offence elements are absent.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.