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

2023 Supreme(Jhk) 1272

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI, J.
Bhanu Pratap Shahi - Petitioner
Versus
State of Jharkhand through CBI - Opposite Party
Cr. Revision No. 1682 of 2017
Decided On : 11-08-2023

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Ajit Kumar, Sr. Adv., Mrs. Akriti Shree, Adv., Ms Aprajita Bhardwaj, Adv.
For the CBI : Mr. Anil Kumar, A.S.G.I., Ms. Chandana Kumari, A.C. to A.S.G.I.

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code - Sections 120-B, 420, 467, 468, and 471 - Prevention of Corruption Act - Sections 13(2), 13(1)(c), and 13(1)(d) - Petition against discharge in corruption case involving procurement of medical supplies above budget - Allegations of conspiracy and misappropriation of funds amounting to Rs. 24,88,44,320/- by health officials - Evidence presented of inflated procurement prices and improper procedural adherence - Defense argues lack of evidence against former minister in charge - Court emphasizes the principle that at discharge stage courts consider only prima facie evidence, not a trial - Petition dismissed. (Paras 2-30)

Table of Content
1. factual background of the case. (Para 2 , 3)
2. petitioner's defense arguments. (Para 4 , 5)
3. discussion on the insufficiency of evidence. (Para 6 , 10 , 11)
4. court's evaluation of evidence. (Para 12 , 13)
5. principles of discharging accused. (Para 14 , 15 , 16)
6. legal standards and requirements for trial proceedings. (Para 17 , 18)
7. nature of the judicial process in discharge applications. (Para 19 , 20)
8. role of conspiracy in criminal misconduct. (Para 21 , 22)
9. distinction of cited case laws and their relevance. (Para 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29)
10. final conclusion regarding dismissal of the petition. (Para 30)

JUDGMENT :

Heard Mr. Ajit Kumar, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Anil Kumar, learned A.S.G.I. appearing for the CBI.

2. This petition has been filed against the order dated 06.09.2017, passed in connection with R.C. 11(A)/2009-AHD-R, lodged for the offences under Sections 120-B, 420, 467, 468 and 471 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE read with Section 13 (2), 13(1)(c) and 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, whereby, the learned court has been pleased to reject the application filed for discharge of the present petitioner, pending in the court of learned Special Judge, CBI, Ranchi.

3. The short facts of the present case are as follows:-

Dr. Pradeep Kumar, IAS, while functioning as the Secretary, Health Department, Government of Jharkhand during the period between 2008 and 2009 entered into a criminal conspiracy with Dr. Vijay Shankar Narayan Singh, State RCH Officer, Namkum, Ranchi with some unknown officials of the Health Department as well as with some Private persons, namely, Shyamal Chakravarty, Dharmendra Kumar Dheeraj, partner of M/s Rebloom, Impex, Basudev Regency Kantatoli, Ranchi and Anoop Chakravarty alias Tullu and in furtherance of the said conspiracy they by abusing their respective official positions as Public Servants fraudulently and dishonestly purchased medicines, medical equipments/appliances, sundry from 19 suppliers worth Rs. 1,30,50, 79,951.74 without assessing the actual requirement and without observing the causal formalities prescribed in this regard. It has been further alleged that the amount squandered was out of the fund allotted for National Rural Health Mission (NRHM) a scheme sponsored and financed by the Government of India. It was further revealed that during the financial year 2007-08 the Health Department of the Government of Jharkhand had invited Tenders for procurement of the medicines for NRHM Scheme and the rates of the medicines were fixed and the medicines were purchased at the fixed rates during the aforesaid financial year and NIT was floated and technical bids were opened and the price bids were not opened and no follow up action was initiated and the Medicines etc. were purchased for during the financial year 2008-09 at the rates approved for the financial year 2007-08 by not adhering to the dos and don'ts of the purchase preference policy of the Government of India which came in force w.e.f. 3rd October 2009, which mandates purchase of 102 nos. of medicines compulsorily from the P.S. Us. It has been further alleged that if the purchase is made adherence to the stipulations in the percentage knowing purchase preference policy a fixed percentage of discount is permissible but knowing that fully well the purchasers were dishonestly and intentionally not made conforming to the guidelines which occasioned enormous unlawful pecuniary loss to the State of Jharkhand and corresponding wrongful gain to themselves and under hand deal was done between the accused public servants and the private suppliers and others namely, Shyamal Chakraverty, Dharmendra Kumar Dheeraj, and Anoop Chakravarty alias Tullu. It has been further alleged that purchase made were not at all need based. It has been further alleged that for the purchasing some of the items in question budget allocation for NRHM Scheme was not taken into account which is ma

    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