Back
GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY
Kedar Prasad Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand through CBI – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Gautam Kumar Choudhary, J.
Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the CBI.
1. The instant Criminal appeal is directed against Judgment of conviction and order of sentence both dated 03.03.2012 passed by learned Spl. Judge-I, CBI/ACB/ AHD, Ranchi, in R.C. Case No.05(A)/1997 (R) whereby the appellant has been convicted under Section 409 IPC and under Sections 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(c) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (in short be called as P.C. Act).
2. The gravamen of allegation against the appellant is that being the Junior Engineer, RCD Division, Jamshedpur on 31.07.1991, he was entrusted with bitumen and when he handed-over the charge on 03.09.1993, it was found that there was a short-fall of bitumen and he had misappropriated total 132.046 MT of bitumen and 0.372 MT of 25 mm dia rod worth several crores rupees by abusing his official position.
3. Initially, Seraikella P.S. Case No.52 of 1996 was registered on 03.09.1996 on the written report lodged by the Executive Engineer, RCD. Later on investigation was taken over by the CBI and Case No.RC-5(A)/1997-RAN. was registered on the order dated 20.02.1997 in CWJC No.10417 of 1996.
4. Aft
The court affirmed the conviction of a Junior Engineer for misappropriating public property, emphasizing the lack of credible evidence for accidental loss and the presence of dishonest intention.
In a criminal trial for misappropriation, reliance on insufficient proof and procedural errors (failure to afford the accused an opportunity to explain) requires acquittal, as reasonable doubt underm....
The prosecution must establish misappropriation, but once entrustment is proven, the burden shifts to the accused to explain the handling of the property.
Public servants must not misuse their position; misappropriation established through evidence confirms legal accountability under the Prevention of Corruption Act and IPC.
Misappropriation by a public servant requires proof of entrustment and dishonest intention, both established here, confirming guilt under the Prevention of Corruption Act and IPC.
Illegal gratification – Minimum sentence under Sections 7 and 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 which has been enhanced by Act 1 of 2014 with effect from 16-1-2014, will not be applicable t....
The accused was convicted for misappropriating public funds by failing to account for money entrusted to her, establishing criminal breach of trust and corrupt practices under the relevant sections.
The court confirmed the conviction for misappropriation and corruption, establishing that the accused alone managed funds, while her confessions were voluntary and credible.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that a public servant can be held liable for criminal misconduct and breach of trust under relevant legal provisions, and the court has the discret....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
