SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Jhk) 1439

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.
Pushpendra Kumar Sinha, son of Late Mithilesh Kumar Sinha – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
Cr.M.P. No. 2632 of 2021
Decided on : 24-01-2022

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Prashant Bhushan, Mr. Pandey Neeraj Rai, Advocate
For the A.C.B. : Mrs. Priya Shrestha, Spl. P.P.

At the stage of framing the charge, the truth, veracity, and effect of the evidence proposed by the prosecutor are not meticulously judged.

Headnote:

Quash - Criminal Proceedings - Indian Penal Code, Prevention of Corruption Act - Sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 477A, 120B, 13(1)(c)(d), 13(2)

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner sought to quash criminal proceedings initiated against him under various sections of the Indian Penal Code and the Prevention of Corruption Act. The allegations included illegal allotment of tender, criminal conspiracy, and causing wrongful loss to the government.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the documents produced by the petitioner were not sufficient to absolve him from the charges framed against him. The court also emphasized that the trial had already begun, and the belated stage of the petition did not merit quashing the proceedings.

Issues: The main issue was whether the documents produced by the petitioner were substantial enough to warrant quashing the criminal proceedings and charges framed against him.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the documents presented by the petitioner, even if true and genuine, were not sufficient to absolve him from the charges. The court also emphasized that at the stage of framing the charge, the truth, veracity, and effect of the evidence proposed by the prosecutor are not meticulously judged.

Final Decision: The criminal miscellaneous petition seeking to quash the entire criminal proceeding and the charges framed was dismissed by the court.

JUDGMENT :

Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.

Heard the parties through video conferencing.

2. This criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed with a prayer to quash the entire criminal proceedings initiated against the petitioner vide Vigilance (Special) Case No. 20 of 2013 (corresponding to Vigilance P.S. Case No. 19 of 2013) registered under Sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 477A with Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code read with Sections 13(1) (c) (d) and under Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and also to quash the order dated 06.08.2021, passed by the learned Special Judge, Anti-Corruption Bureau, Ranchi in Misc. Cr. Application No. 1171 of 2019 and to quash/set aside, with all consequences, the order framing charge dated 18.11.2021 as well as the charges framed on 18.11.2021.

3. The brief facts of the case is that The First Information Report in this case was registered with the allegation that under APDRP scheme related to the towns of Ranchi, Khunti, Ramgarh, Jamtara and Pakur, it was detected that illegal allotment of tender was given to the contractor under criminal conspiracy by the petitioner along with the co-accused persons by misusing their power and post as Public Servants. It is further alleged that the members of the Tender Evaluation Committee were changed many times to finalize the tender and the approval of the competent authority in submitting the revised price was not found in the file. It is also alleged that the cost of that was not approved by the Board and that under criminal conspiracy of the petitioner along with the co-accused persons, the approval of the tender was made ignoring the advice of accounts department to the contrary. It is also alleged that projects of Ranchi town as well as the other towns of the year 2004 was decided in the year 2008 and the work order was placed by escalating the estimate. It is further alleged that the complicity of the petitioner is evident from the fact that on account of intentional delay in allotment of the work, the amount had to be raised substantially and the petitioner is responsible for huge amount of wrongful loss caused to the Board. The further specific allegation against the petitioner is that although the Accounts Section of Jharkhand State Electricity Board made an objection regarding the procedure of tender but the petitioner overruled the objection and made favourable noting in favour of the contractor which was approved by the Chairman and in the process the evaluation report submitted by MECON was totally ignored in order to provide benefit to the party concerned. It is also alleged that Ranchi district was allotted Rs. 18.81 crore approximately in the year 2004 for this program but tender was finalized in the year 2008 at a cost of Rs. 34.25 crores approximately causing huge wrongful loss to the state.

4. After submission of charge sheet the petitioner filed a petition for discharge. The same was rejected by the learned trial court. The petitioner earlier filed Criminal Revision No. 578 of 2018 before this court challenging the said rejection of the prayer of the petitioner for discharge in the case and a coordinate bench by the order dated 07.05.2019 dismissed the said revision application. Though the petitioner moved the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India against the said order passed by the coordinate bench of this court vide SLP (Crl.) no. 7338 of 2019, but the said special leave petition stood dismissed as withdrawn vide the order dated 23.08.2019 of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India.

5. It is submitted by Mr Prashant Bhushan the learned counsel for the petitioner that during the earlier journey of the petitioner before this court as well as the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India the petitioner could not place the report of the Public Accounts Committee dated 23.10.2008 wherein it has been observed that the delay was caused everywhere in the country and the same could not be attributed to any officer of the Jharkhand State Electricit

            Click Here to Read the rest of this document
            1
            2
            3
            4
            5
            6
            7
            8
            9
            10
            11
            SupremeToday Portrait Ad
            supreme today icon
            logo-black

            An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

            Please visit our Training & Support
            Center or Contact Us for assistance

            qr

            Scan Me!

            India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

            For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

            whatsapp-icon Back to top