Discharge in procurement prosecution sustained where committee approvals, no pecuniary gain, and weak allegations failed to raise grave suspicion.

At the discharge stage, the HC held that prosecution could not continue where procurement decisions were taken by multi-member TEC and CEC bodies, approved by the Director, and the record showed no direct or indirect pecuniary benefit to either applicant. Allegations of diluted tender conditions, rejection of the MIC bid, and a false test report were found unsupported by sufficient material to create grave suspicion. The Court also treated the second applicant's exoneration in departmental proceedings on the same allegations as a material circumstance. On that limited scrutiny, the applicants were entitled to discharge and the revision applications succeeded.

---

---

Issues: Whether the applicants were entitled to discharge in the criminal case in view of the procurement process followed by the committee structure, the absence of any allegation of personal pecuniary gain, the rejection of the MIC Electronics bid, the test report issued by the first applicant, and the exoneration of the second applicant in departmental proceedings.

Analysis: The procurement decisions were taken through TEC and CEC comprising multiple members and were approved by the Director, IITM. The record did not show any direct or indirect pecuniary benefit to either applicant, and the allegations of dilution of tender conditions, rejection of the MIC bid, and issuance of a false test report were not supported by sufficient material to raise grave suspicion against them. The departmental enquiry against the second applicant, based on substantially the same allegations and evidence, ended in exoneration on merits, and the Court treated that result as a material circumstance while assessing whether a criminal conviction could realistically follow. Applying the limited scope of scrutiny at the discharge stage, the Court held that continuation of prosecution would be unwarranted.

Conclusion: The applicants were entitled to discharge and the revision applications succeeded.

---