SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
(FROM PATNA)
J.M. SHELAT, J. : S.C. ROY, J.
HARIHAR PRASAD ETC., APPELLANTS
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR, RESPONDENT. Criminal Appeals Nos. 115 to 120 of 1967 (Cri. Appeals Nos. 406, 386, 376, 392 and 398 of 1964, D/- 24-3-1967 - Pat.).
Date of decision: September 7, 1971.
Advocates appeared
Mr. Sarjoo Prasad, Sr. Advocate (Mr. S. N. Prasad, Advocate with him) (In Cr. A No. 115 of 1967), Mr. Debobrata Mookherjee, Sr. Advocate (Mr. A. K. Nag, Advocate with him) (In Cr. A. No. 116 of 1967), M/s. K. K. Sinha, B. B. Sinha, Satyesh Kumar Sinha, S. S. Jauhar, Advocates (In Cr. A. No. 117 of 1967), M/s. K. K. Sinha and G. S. Chatterjee, Advocates (In Cr. A. No. 118 of 1967), M/s. D. Goburdhun, A. D. Prasad and R. Goburdhun, Advocates (In Cr. A. No. 119 of 1967 and Mr. A. S. R. Chari, Sr. Advocate (M/s. K. L. Mehta and S. K. Mehta, Advocates of M/s. K. L. Mehta and Co. and Mr. K. R. Nagraj, Advocates with him) (In Cr. A. No. 120 of 1967), for Appellants.
Mr. N. S. Bindra, Sr. Advocate (Mr. R. C. Prasad, Advocate with him) (In Cr. A. Nos. 115 and 116 of 1967), Mr. B. P. Jha, Advocate (In Cr. A. Nos. 117, 119 and 120 of 1967) and M/s. U. P. Singh, S. P. Singh and Santok Singh, Advocates (In Cr. A. No. 118 of 1967), for Respondents.
Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 120-B r/w 409 - Prevention of Corruption Act - Sections 5(2) r/w 5(1)(d) - Criminal conspiracy - Criminal breach of trust and cheating in respect of large amounts of Government money earmarked for a Project - Offences are stated to have taken place between Among accused persons was appellant Criminal Appeal - He was Additional then proceeded on leave preparatory to retirement. The appellant in Criminal Appeal was Barneshwar Prasad Sinha alias Lallan - Whether on grounds of urgency or otherwise, an executive officer is required by superior authority to carry out a work or incur a liability which involves any infringement of these financial rules, the orders of such authority should be conveyed in writing - Held, A conspiracy consists not merely in the intention of two or more, but in agreement of two or more to do an unlawful act, or to do a lawful act by unlawful means. So long as such a design rests in intention only, it is not indictable. When two agree to carry it into effect the very plot is an act in itself and act of each of parties, promise against promise actus contra actum, capable of being enforced, if lawful, punishable if for a criminal object or for use of use of criminal means - There is no much chance of these offences being repeated now. In the circumstances of the case, we make following order – Conviction confirmed - Appeals dismissed.
JUDGMENT
ROY, J.:- There were six appellants in this case. Three of them were officers of the government of the State of Bihar and others were contractors. All these persons are alleged to have entered into a criminal conspiracy for committing the offences of criminal breach of trust and cheating in respect of large amounts of Government money earmarked for a Project known as "Mahuadar Development Block Pilot Project". The Project was for the welfare of the scheduled tribes under a scheme sponsored by the Government of India for a period ending with 1960-61.
2. Mahuadar Block is in Latehar Sub-Division of the District of Palamau. The offences are stated to have taken place between February 1957 and March 1958. Among the accused persons Narendra Kumar Banerjee (also referred to as N. K. Banerjee), was the appellant Criminal Appeal No. 116 of 1967. He was the Additional Collector of Palamau from November 23, 1956 to September 30, 1957. He then proceeded on leave preparatory to retirement. The appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 118 of 1967 was Barneshwar Prasad Sinha alias Lallan. He was the Development Head Clerk in the Deputy Commissioner s office at Daltonganj during the relevant period Harihar Prasad, the appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 115 of 1967. was the Project Executive Officer in his capacity of the Block Development Officer of Mahuadar throughout the relevant period. One Muhammad Usman Beg, was an overseer, and one Nand Kishore Prasad, was the Asstt. Engineer, attached to the Block. Among the contractors was Krishna Lal Sahani who was the appellant in Cri. Appeal No. 117 of 1967, now deceased, whose interests are being looked after by his son under an order of this Court, and Banarsi Lal Kohili the appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 120 of 1967. There remains the third contractor - appellant Jwala Prasad, whose Appeal No. is Criminal Appeal No. 119 of 1967.
3. Mahuadar is situated in the interior of Palamau a District in Chhota Nagpur. It is the headquarters of a Block comprising about 106 villages. The headquarters of the District is at Daltonganj situated at a distance of about 64 miles from Mahuadar. In the villages of this Block the population is predominantly "aboriginal (scheduled tribes)". At first a National Extension Service (N.E.S.) Block was established at Mahuadar with a Block Development Officer in charge of it. The sanctioned grant for the Block was Rs. 12 lakhs. In 1956-57 the Government of India sponsored a scheme of intensive multi-purpose development for the welfare of scheduled tribes. One of the main objects was to wean away the tribal people from the pursuit of shifting cultivation and to induce and enable them to take to settle cultivation. Pursuant to this scheme the Mahuadar N.E.S. Block was converted into a special multi-purpose Block from January 1957. In the State of Bihar, eight such special multipurpose projects were taken up. Under the scheme each Block was to have schematic budget of Rs. 27 Lakhs. This amount of Rs. 27 lakhs was to be allocated to each Block from the very start without limiting the expenditure in the early stages. And the emphasis was laid upon the "effective and expeditious implementation of the programme". The anxiety of the Government of India for speedy implementation of the scheme was conveyed to the State Government in correspondence which included the letter dated December 31, 1956.
4. An outline of the scheme was communicated to the Commissioners of the Divisions and was also received by S. K. Sinha, I.A.S., the Deputy Commissioner of Palamau. He was informed that Rs. 27 lakhs as aforesaid would be available for the entire period of five years. Two Schedules were attached - Sch. I contained a break-up of the schematic budget. Sch. II to the letter contained the details of estimated expenditure during the current financial year i.e. 1956-57. There were estimates for Mahuadar Block during 1956-57 estimated under different heads. This letter directed that the tentative prog
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.