Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
M. Dhandapani, J.
Bhima Razu Prasad & Others – Appellant
Versus
State, Rep. by Deputy Superintendent of Police, SBI/SPE/ACU-II, New Delhi – Respondent
CRL. A. Nos. 1089, 1090 & 1091 of 2007
Decided On : 06-01-2020
India Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 192 and 193 – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 195 and 340 - Corruption Act - Sections 13 - Investigation - Request for return back of money - Premises was searched by presence and others was member of search party and who had signed in inventory of materials seized which is marked as pertains to seizure of gold jeweler and is marked as Annexure pertains to seizure of currency and other household articles and are marked as Annexure and Annexure respectively - Seized currency notes were marked as series - On execution of search warrant along with articles seized as shown in search list along with currency seized were produced before Court and were left in custody of court – Held, Likewise once conspiracy stands proved non examination value or no steps having been taken to value properties forming part of sale agreements pales into insignificance – Similarly non examination of auditor also does not in any way lend hand to appellants in establishing their defense and is in no way detriment to prosecution case – Therefore this Court is not concerned with omissions in investigation as lacunae in investigation will in no way endure to benefit of appellants as defense projected by them has got shattered by their own materials which have been adverted to above - Therefore this Court is of considered view that conviction appellants as recorded by trial court deserves to be confirmed - Counsel appearing for appellants submitted that in event of this Court finding appellants guilty of charges this Court considering age of appellants who are senior citizens and by now aged about years old, may consider minimum sentence taking into consideration age of appellants and also passage of time from date of registration of case - This Court after taking into consideration submissions of senior counsel appearing for appellants and also considering age of appellants and also fact that cognizance of case was taken in year and that almost two decades have passed since taking cognizance of case this Court is of considered view that statute having not prescribed any minimum sentence hence it would meet ends of justice if minimum sentence is awarded to appellants – Appeal dismissed
JUDGMENT :
(Prayer: Criminal Appeals filed u/s 374 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, against the judgment and order dated 25.10.07, passed by the learned Addl. Special Judge for CBI Cases, Chennai, in C.C. No.10 of 2002.)
1. The accused/appellants herein, along with one other accused, were arrayed as A-1 to A-4 and they were charged and tried before the learned Addl. Special Judge for CBI Cases, Chennai, in C.C. No.10/2002 for the offences u/s 120 (B) r/w 193 and 193 IPC and Sections 13 (2) r/w 13 (1) (e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and on being found guilty, the appellants herein were convicted and sentenced as under :-
| Accused | Section | Sentence |
| A-1 | U/s 13 (2) r/w 13 (1) (e) of PC Act U/s 120 (B) IPCU/s 193 IPC | Convicted and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for a period of two years and to pay a fine of Rs.50,000/-, in default to undergo imprisonment for a period of three months. Convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs.50,000/-, in default to undergo imprisonment for a period of three months. Convicted and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs.50,000/-, in default to undergo imprisonment for a period of three months. |
| A-2 | U/s 120 (B) IPC U/s 193 IPC | Convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs.50,000/-, in default to undergo imprisonment for a period of three months. Convicted and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs.50,000/-, in default to undergo imprisonment for a period of three months. |
| A-3 | U/s 120 (B) IPC U/s 193 IPC | Convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs.50,000/-, in default to undergo imprisonment for a period of three months. Convicted and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs.50,000/-, in default to undergo imprisonment for a period of three months. |
2. The brief facts, necessary for disposal of these appeals, are as hereunder:-
Initially, a case in RC 1/2001 was registered against A-1 u/s 120 (B) r/w 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC and Section 13 (2) r/w 13 (1) (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act (for short 'PC Act') on 4.1.01. Subsequent to the registration of the case, search was conducted by the officers of the respondent headed by P.W.49 at the residence of A-1 on 24.1.01 on the basis of the search warrant issued by the Special Judge, Tis Hazari Court, New Delhi. In the said search an amount of Rs.79,65,900/- in addition to property papers and jewellery were also seized and search list, Ex.P-5 was prepared.
3. The premises of A-1 was searched by P.W.49 on 24.1.01 in the presence of P.W.2 and others. P.W.2, was a member of the search party and who had signed in the inventory of the materials seized, which is marked as Exs.P-6 and P-7. Ex.P-6 pertains to the seizure of gold jewellery and is marked as Annexure 'B'; Ex.P-7 pertains to the seizure of currency and other household articles and are marked as Annexure 'A' and Annexure 'C' respectively. The seized currency notes were marked as M.O.1 series. On execution of the search warrant, the warrant along with the articles seized, as shown in the search list, Ex.P-5, along with the currency seized were produced before the Court and were left in the custody of the court. Pursuant to the said search, decision was taken to register a disproportionate assets case against A-1 and, accordingly, after obtaining the requisite sanction, Ex.P-126, from P.W.50, the appropriate authority, the present crime, viz., RC ACO II/2001 A 0004 was registered based on the above search of the premises of A-1 on 9.3.01 and investigation of the case was carri
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
