Back
2019 Supreme(Del) 553
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
SUNIL GAUR, J.
Nihal Chand and Others - Appellants
Versus
CBI - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 18, 21 of 2013
Decided On : 07-05-2019
Roopansh Purohit, Adv., Anil Grover, Adv., Noopur Singhal, Adv.
Headnote:
Corruption - Prevention of Corruption Act - 120B IPC, 420 IPC, 468 IPC, 471 IPC, 13(2) r/w 13(1) (d) PC Act - [Corruption] - [Prevention of Corruption Act] - [120B IPC, 420 IPC, 468 IPC, 471 IPC, 13(2) r/w 13(1) (d) PC Act] - The court found the appellants guilty of offenses under various sections of the IPC and the Prevention of Corruption Act related to a conspiracy to defraud MTNL by making bogus payments for repair work that was never carried out. The court relied on evidence from witnesses and inspection reports to establish the guilt of the accused. However, the defense argued that the bills and inspection reports were justified by the actual work done, and that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. Ultimately, the court found that the prosecution had failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt and acquitted the appellants.
Fact of the Case:
The appellants were found guilty of entering into a criminal conspiracy to defraud MTNL by making bogus payments for repair work that was never carried out. The prosecution relied on evidence from witnesses and inspection reports to establish the guilt of the accused.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt against the appellants, and therefore acquitted them.
Issues: The main issue was whether the appellants were guilty of the offenses under various sections of the IPC and the Prevention of Corruption Act related to a conspiracy to defraud MTNL.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the failure of the prosecution to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt, despite relying on evidence from witnesses and inspection reports.
Final Decision: The court acquitted the appellants due to the prosecution's failure to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt.
Sunil Gaur, J.
Impugned judgment of 19th December, 2012 holds appellantsNihal Chand (Executive Engineer Civil), RC Bansal AE (Civil), Anil Kumar( Jr. Engineer) and Gulshan Kumar (Contractor) guilty for the offences under Sections under Sections 420/468/471 IPC r/w 120B IPC; Section13(2) r/w Section 13(1) (d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (henceforth referred to as the "PC Act") and Section 120B IPC r/w Section 420/468/471 IPC and Section 13(2) r/w Section 13(1) (d) of PC Act in RC No. 69(A)/03. Vide impugned order of 20th December, 2012, the aforesaid appellants have been sentenced as under:-
"CC 31/11
Convict Nihal Chand
u/S 120B IPC:
Rigorous Imprisonment for 02 years and fine of Rs.10,000/- in default SI for 06 months
u/S 420 IPC:
Rigorous Imprisonment for 02 years and fine of Rs.10,000/- in default SI for 06 months
u/S 468 IPC:
Rigorous Imprisonment for 02 years and fine of Rs.10,000/- in default SI for 06 months
u/S 471 IPC:
Rigorous Imprisonment for 02 years and fine of Rs.10,000/- in default SI for 06 months
u/S 13(1) (d) r/w 13 (2) PC Act :
Rigorous Imprisonment for 03 years and fine of Rs.20,000/- in default SI for 06 months
Convict RC Bansal
u/S 120B IPC:
Rigorous Imprisonment for 02 years and fine of Rs.10,000/- in default SI for 06 months
u/S 420 IPC:
Rigorous Imprisonment for 02 years and fine of Rs.10,000/- in default SI for 06 months
u/S 468 IPC:
Rigorous Imprisonment for 02 years and fine of Rs.10,000/- in default SI for 06 months
u/S 471 IPC:
Rigorous Imprisonment for 02 years and fine of Rs.10,000/- in default SI for 06 months
u/S 13(1) (d) r/w 13 (2) PC Act :
Rigorous Imprisonment for 03 years and fine of Rs.20,000/- in default SI for 06 months
Convict Anil Kumar
u/S 120B IPC:
Rigorous Imprisonment for 02 years and fine of Rs.10,000/- in default SI for 06 months
u/S 420 IPC:
Rigorous Imprisonment for 02 years and fine of Rs.10,000/- in default SI for 06 months
u/S 468 IPC:
Rigorous Imprisonment for 02 years and fine of Rs.10,000/- in default SI for 06 months
u/S 471 IPC:
Rigorous Imprisonment for 02 years and fine of Rs.10,000/- in default SI for 06 months
u/S 13(1) (d) r/w 13 (2) PC Act :
Rigorous Imprisonment for 03 years and fine of Rs.20,000/- in default SI for 06 months
Convict Gulshan Kumar
u/S 120B IPC:
Rigorous Imprisonment for 02 years and fine of Rs.10,000/- in default SI for 06 months
u/S 420 IPC:
Rigorous Imprisonment for 02 years and fine of Rs.10,000/- in default SI for 06 months
u/S 468 IPC:
Rigorous Imprisonment for 02 years and fine of Rs.10,000/- in default SI for 06 months
u/S 471 IPC:
Rigorous Imprisonment for 02 years and fine of Rs.10,000/- in default SI for 06 months
2. The facts as noted in the impugned judgment are as under:-
"1.0 RC No. 69(A)/03/ACB/CBI was registered on 30/12/03 on the basis of an information that accused persons namely Nihal Chand Executive Engineer (Civil), RC Bansal, AE (Civil), Anil Kumar Jr. Engineer had entered into a criminal conspiracy with Gulshan Kumar Contractor (co accused proprietor of M/s Sarvodaya Constructions Pvt. Ltd.) during the year 2003-04 to defraud MTNL by way of making bogus payments to M/s Sarvodaya Constructions Company to the tune of Rs,3,92,131/- against agreement No. 64/EE(CM)N/MTNL/03-04. The payment related to the repair of damaged flooring at Sanchar Haat, Telephone Exchange, Shakti Nagar, Delhi, wherein no such work was carried out. The accused persons in conspiracy with each other forged the record and the bill was passed by Executive Engineer Nihal Chand in conspiracy with coaccused and payment was made to the M/s Sarvodaya Construction company vide cheque No.7319555 dated 12/9/03. The physica
