Reliance on documents not in prosecution's material for discharging accused under Section 239 Cr.P.C. is improper; valid evidence of conspiracy and forgery demands a trial.

JUDGMENT :

S.V.N. BHATTI, J.

1. Leave granted.

2. The criminal appeals arise from the common order dated 27.12.2021 in Criminal RC No. 3388/2017 and ten other cases in the High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati. The prosecution/CBI is the Appellant in the batch of appeals.

3. On 27.06.2006, the CBI, Visakhapatnam registered FIR RC No. 11(A)/2006-CBI/VSP under sections 120B read with 420 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE , 1860 (‘IPC’) and sections 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (‘PC Act’). The registration of crime was against one, Rayapati Subba Rao/A-1 and a few other unknown individuals.

4. Between November 1994 and May 2006, A-1 served as Cotton Purchase Officer (‘CPO’) in the Cotton Corporation of India (‘CCI’), Guntur Branch. The alleged offences for which the suo motu FIR was registered by the CBI are said to have happened in the financial year 2004-05. The CCI, as part of a policy, buys cotton at the Minimum Support Price (‘MSP’) on a year-to-year basis. The CCI, for the financial 2004-05, released the policy of MSP through letters CCI/HO/PUR/MSP/2002-2003 dated 10.01.2003, CCI/HO/PUR/2004-2005 dated 18.10.2004, and CCI/HO/PUR/2005-2006 dated 26.12.2005.

5. The relevant parts of the above circulars are excerpted below:

“CCI/HO/PUR/MSP/2002-2003

(…)

Through this letter, it is again advised that whenever kapas purchases are effected under MSP, the same should be made only from the market yards/functional market yards and in the presence of representatives of the APMCs so that cotton farmers get due benefit of MSP operations.

(…)

The kapas produce brought directly by farmers only in the market yard be purchased and prices be offered based on the quality of kapas under MSP guidelines so that farmers get due benefit for their produce.

xxx xxx xxx

CCI/HO/PUR/MSP/2004-05

(…)

The kapas meeting the quality parameters of FAQ grade, can be purchased at the minimum support price without any quantitative limits. However, in actual practice, a good portion of daily arrivals may fall short of the FAQ grade parameters and in order to help the cotton farmers, Corporation may purchase below FAQ grade kapas with suitable discounts from the support price of the concerned variety.

(…)

Needless to say all purchases under MSP are to be made strictly through the market yards and in the presence of APMC representatives.

xxx xxx xxx

CCI/HO/PUR/MSP/2005-2006

(…)

As the main objective of MSP operations is to protect the interests of the cotton farmers therefore through this circular, it is again advised that whenever kapas purchases are effected under MSP, the same should be made only from the market yards/functional market yards and in the presence of officials/representatives of the APMCs so that the farmers get due benefit of MSP operations.

(…)

The kapas produce brought directly by farmers only in the market yard/notified market yards be purchased and prices be offered based on the quality of kapas under MSP guidelines so farmers get due benefit for their produce.”

6. The investigation into RC No. 11(A)/2006-CBI/VSP disclosed a pattern of buying cotton at the then prevailing market rate, which is lower than the MSP and selling the hoarded cotton to CCI and availing the MSP made available for the farmers of cotton. The investigation revealed an alleged conspiracy between A-1 and one RVK Prasad/A-3, proprietor of M/s Balachamundeswari Cotton Company Limited. Notably, A-3 is the son of A-1. The investigation further implicated Syed John Syda/A-2, a supervisor at the Agricultural Market Committee (‘AMC’) Phirangipuram and 45 others as accused in RC No. 11(A)/2006-CBI/VSP.

7. The modus operandi, briefly stated as per the prosecution, is that A-1 and A-3 alle