At the stage of discharge or framing of a charge, the court cannot evaluate the pros and cons of the evidence and facts, and holding a mini trial is impermissible.

JUDGMENT :

G.A. SANAP, J.

1. Heard.

2. ADMIT. Heard finally with the consent of learned Advocates for the parties.

3. In this revision application, challenge is to the order dated 04.01.2020, passed by the learned Special Judge, Special Court of C.B.I., Nagpur, whereby the learned Special Judge rejected the application at Exh. 154 made by the applicant/accused No. 6 for his discharge in a Special CBI case No. 1 of 2014.

4. The facts are as follows:

On the basis of source information, against the unknown officials of Indian Bureau of Mines (For short ‘IBM’), Nagpur, the Directors and employees of M/s. Jayaswals Neco Limited and other private persons, on 03.07.2012, the FIR No. RC 219 2012(E) 0006, for the offences punishable under Section 120-B read with Section 420 read with Sections 511, 468, 471 of the Indian Penal Code (For short ‘the IPC’) and Sections 13(2) read with section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (for short ‘the P.C. Act’), was registered. The investigation conducted in the crime led to filing of chargesheet against eight accused persons. It is the case of Central Bureau of Investigation (For short ‘CBI’) that the officials of IBM, Nagpur in connivance with the Directors/Officials of M/s. Jayaswals Neco Limited committed the acts of forgery, cheating etc. for grant of mining lease of four areas of 186 HR, 381 HR, 388 HR and 646.47 HR held under preferential licences by submitting the statutory prospecting reports to the State Government, without undertaking the prospecting operations. It is stated that Government of Chhattisgarh, vide its order dated 31.01.2007, rejected the mining lease applications of M/s. Jayaswals Neco Limited, on the ground that the statutory prospecting reports, claimed to have been prepared and submitted by M/s. Jayaswals Neco Limited in May 2000, had reference of State of Chhattisgarh at several places, whereas the state came into existence on 01.11.2000 and as such, the claim of M/s. Jayaswals Neco Limited regarding submissions of statutory prospecting reports in May 2000 was false. In this process, the documents were forged. In the revision application, filed by M/s. Jayaswals Neco Limited against the order of Government of Chhattisgarh before the Mines Tribunal, the documents produced by M/s. Jayaswals Neco Limited were found to be forged. It is stated that during the period from 1999 to 2008 the accused No. 9 Arvind Jayaswal entered into criminal conspiracy with the co-accused including the accused No. 6 and pursuant to the said criminal conspiracy all the accused persons attempted to cheat the State of Chhattisgarh to the tune of more than Rs.80,000/- crores value of the Iron Ore reserves estimated to be over 280 million tons in the Rowghat area of Narayanpur Forest, Chhattisgarh by using the forged documents for the purpose of granting mining lease over the four areas without actually conducting the prospecting operations in the said area. The CBI conducted the investigation and after thorough investigation found sufficient material to establish the complicity of the accused persons in the commission of the above crimes. Therefore, the CBI filed the chargesheet against the accused.

5. Accused No. 6 made an application for discharge under Section 227 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. It is his case that he has been working in various companies for last 36 years. During his professional carrier he had never been involved in any kind of wrong doing or illegal activities. It is stated that in September 2001, he worked as vice president of M/s. Jayaswals Neco Limited. In the month of November 2004, he joined as a ‘Director’ on the board of Directors of Corporate Ispat Alloys Limited, Nagpur, formally a part of the Neco Group of Companies, which included M/s. Jayaswals Neco Limited. Accused No. 6 stated that he signed number of letters/documents in his capacity as a Director of M/s. Jayaswals Neco Limited in the ordinary course of his official functions. This reflects upon h