IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA, J.
Shri Pawan Kumar Rajak, Son of Shri Vishnu Rajak - Appellant
Versus
Union of India through CBI Bihar - Respondent
Criminal Appeal (SJ) No.973 of 2022 with Criminal Appeal (SJ) No. 1346 of 2022
Decided On : 18-12-2024
JUDGMENT :
(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J.)
This appeal has been preferred by both appellants/convicts under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Code’) challenging the judgment of conviction dated 21.02.2022 and order of sentence dated 28.02.2022 passed by learned Special Judge, CBI-1, Patna in Special Case No. 01 of 13 (arising out of R.C. No. 9(A) of 2013), whereby the concerned Trial Court has convicted appellant/convict Pawan Kumar Rajak in Cr. APP (SJ) No. 973 of 2022 for the offences punishable under Section 420, 467, 468, 471 of Indian Penal Code (in short “I.P.C.”), Section 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act 1988 (in short the “P.C. Act”) and Section 120B read with Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 and Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the P.C. Act and appellant/convict Aftab Alam in Cr. APP (SJ) No. 1346 of 2022 for the offences punishable under Section 420 of the IPC and Section 120B of IPC read with Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and Sections 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the P.C. Act, where they have been sentenced accordingly:-
| Sl.No. | Name of appellant | Under Section | Sentence | Fine | In default of payment of fine. |
| 1. | Pawan Kumar Rajak | 420 IPC | R.I. for 5 years | 10,000/- | 6 months |
| 467 IPC | R.I. for 7 years | 10,000/- | 6 months | ||
| 468 IPC | R.I. for 5 years | 10,000/- | 6 months | ||
|
|
| 471 IPC | R.I. for 7 years | 10,000/- | 6 months |
| 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 | R.I. for 3 years | 5,000/- | 6 months | ||
|
|
| ||||
| 120B read with 420, 467, 468 and 471 of the IPC and 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 | R.I. for 7 year | 5,000/- | 6 months | ||
| 2. | Aftab Alam @ Md. Aftab Alam | 420 IPC | R.I. for 5 years | 10,000/- | 6 months |
| 120B of IPC read with 420, 467, 468, 471 | R.I. for 7 years | 5,000/- | 6 months | ||
|
|
| and 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 |
|
|
|
|
| All aforesaid sentences are ordered to run concurrently. | ||||
2. The case of prosecution in brief is as under :
This case was registered in CBI, ACB, Patna on 30.04.2013 on the basis of written complaint of Senior Divisional Manager, LIC Patna Division, Office-I Patna, (PW8/informant) against Pawan Kumar Rajak, Assistant LIC, Patna Sahib Branch, Patna City, Patna, Aftab Alam, LIC Agent, Patna Sahib Branch, Patna and six other accused persons named in the FIR. It has been alleged that Pawan Kumar Rajak (Assistant LIC) entered into criminal conspiracy with Aftab Alam (LIC Agent) and other accused named in the FIR and in pursuance thereof fraudulently debited Policy Loan account of the said branch for defalcating huge amount by using LIC software application and by using its “ADD Pay option” in policy loan payment module as well as preparing forged vouchers and by this way dishonestly and fraudulently withdrew sum of Rs. 82 Lakhs from the Policy Loan Account of LIC, Patna Sahib Branch. Apart from this Pawan Kumar Rajak (Assistant LIC) also removed all the vouchers of all the fraudulent payments. All the fraudulent vouchers were entered into the module by Pawan Kumar Rajak (Assistant LIC) having SR/Employee No. 339411, accessible only by him.
3. On the basis of aforesaid written complaint, CBI registered a case, as Special Case No. 01 of 2013 (R.C. No. 9(A) of 2013) dated 30.04.2013 for the offence punishable under Section 120B read with 201, 420, 467, 468, 471 of the IPC and also read with Sections 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of the P.C. Act, whereafter the investigation, the police submitted charge-sheet no. 21 of 2013 under Section 120B read with 201, 420, 467, 468 and 471 of the IPC and Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the P.C. Act.
4. The learned
Arjun Panditrao Khatkar Vs. Kailash Khushanrao Gorantyal
The prosecution failed to establish beyond reasonable doubt that the appellants committed fraud or were involved in a criminal conspiracy, leading to their acquittal.
(1) Criminal conspiracy, cheating and forgery by public servant – It may be a case of grave suspicion, but it is not a case where it can be said that prosecution established its case beyond reasonabl....
The prosecution failed to prove the charges of forgery and conspiracy beyond reasonable doubt due to irregularities in evidence collection.
Prosecution failed to provide sufficient evidence to uphold charges of forgery and conspiracy, relying instead on mere suspicion, resulting in the acquittal of the accused.
The prosecution failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt the offences of conspiracy and forgery against the appellants, with mere suspicion not serving as a substitute for valid evidence.
Conviction for forgery and misappropriation requires clear proof of entrustment and intent to defraud, which was lacking, leading to acquittal.
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.