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

2025 Supreme(Ori) 1148

THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
SIBO SANKAR MISHRA, J.
Pruthwiraj Lenka – Appellant
Versus
State of Odisha (Vigilance) – Respondent
CRLA No.355 of 2019
Decided On : 30 05 2025

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. P.K. Maharaj, Advocate
For the Respondent: Mr. Niranjan Maharana, Additional Standing Counsel

In criminal proceedings, mere inaccuracies in records do not establish intent to defraud unless there is compelling evidence of willful misconduct.

Headnote:(A) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 380 - Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 - Section 13(1)(c) and 13(2) - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 477-A, 409, 120-B, 201 - Appeal against conviction for false entries in measurement book regarding government funds - Charges of misappropriation and conspiracy were not proven against appellant; conviction under Section 477-A was erroneous as intent to defraud was not established - Trial Court acquitted co-accused, raising doubt on appellant's culpability. (Paras 1-16)

(B) Intention and Mens Rea - Essential ingredients of intent under Section 477-A require willful deceit to defraud; minor discrepancies may not indicate criminal intent. (Para 9)

(C) Sanction for Prosecution - No sanction required against the appellant since he resigned prior to charges being filed. (Para 4)

Facts of the case:
The appellant was convicted for making false entries in a measurement book, allegedly inflating costs during a construction project, while co-accused were acquitted of conspiracy and other charges.

Findings of Court:
The Court found insufficient evidence of intent to defraud; discrepancies were minor and did not demonstrate willful misconduct.

Issues: Whether the trial court erred in convicting the appellant under Section 477-A while acquitting co-accused of misappropriation and conspiracy charges?

Ratio Decidendi: Merely making inaccurate measurements does not automatically imply intent to defraud; judgment of conviction cannot stand when core elements of the offence are not established beyond reasonable doubt.

Result: Appeal allowed; conviction set aside, appellant acquitted of all charges.

Table of Content
1. appeal against conviction under ipc. (Para 1 , 2)
2. details of accusations and evidence. (Para 3 , 4)
3. appellant's defense and arguments against conviction. (Para 5 , 6)
4. arguments supporting prosecution's position. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10)
5. doubts raised over conviction based on evidence. (Para 11 , 12 , 13)
6. analysis and reasoning regarding the conviction. (Para 14 , 15)
7. final order acquitting the appellant. (Para 16)

JUDGMENT :

SIBO SANKAR MISHRA, J.

1. The appellant-Pruthwiraj Lenka has filed this appeal under Section 380 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 to set aside the judgment of conviction passed against him by the learned Special Judge (Vigilance), Phulbani in G.R. Case No.74 of 2013 (v) (T.R. No.74 of 2013) /G.R. Case No.52/2011 (v) (T.R. No.08 of 2013 BAM) arising out of Berhampur Vigilance P.S. Case No.52, dated 28.11.2011 vide impugned judgment and order dated 16.05.2019 under section 477-A of the Indian Penal Code and order of sentence to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- (rupees five thousand), in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a further period of three months.

2. The appellant was the Technical Consultant of K. Nuagaon Block, Office of the D.P.C., D.P.E.P., S.S.A. in the district of Kandhamal. The co-accused Basant Kumar Mohanty was the Headmaster of Asumadhi Primary School (hereafter ‘the school’) for the period from 10.05.2002 to 28.02.2008, and co-accused Kantheswar Pradhan was the SEC- President of the school for the period from 31.08.2004 to 02.04.2011. The appellant along with the co-accused Basanta Kumar Mohanty and Kantheswar Pradhan were charged under Section 13 (1)(c) punishable under (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter ‘1988 Act’) and Sections 409 , 120-B, 201 of the Indian Penal Code on the accusation that in between the year 2005 to 2007, they dishonestly or fraudulently misappropriated or otherwise converted for their own use Rs.75,798/- (rupees seventy five thousand seven hundred ninety eight) from the school account sanctioned for construction of one additional classroom in the school and they committed criminal breach of trust in respect of the property/amount so entrusted. The appellant was charged additionally and separately for the offence under Section 477 -A of the Indian Penal Code on the further accusation that during the period from 2005 to 2007, he wilfully with intention to defraud entered false measurements in the Measurement Book No.144, which was received by him on behalf of his employer D.P.C., S.S.S., Kandhamal and was under his possession.

The learned Trial Court acquitted the co-accused Kantheswar Pradhan of all the charges and he was set at liberty. The appellant and the co-accused Basnata Kumar Mohanty were acquitted of the charges under Sections 120 -B and 201 of the Indian Penal Code. The appellant was also acquitted of the charges under Section 409 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 13 (1)(c) punishable under (2) of the 1988 Act. The appellant was found guilty only for the offence under Section 477 -A of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The prosecution case, in short, is that pursuant to an allegation of misappropriation of Government money in construction of one additional classroom of the school under K. Nuagaon Block in the district of Kandhamal, a vigilance enquiry was taken up by Santosh Kumar Samantara (P.W.8), Inspector of Vigilance, Berhampur Division. During enquiry, it was found that in the year 2004-05, for construction of one additional classroom of the school, a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- was approved by the D.P.C., D.P.E.P., Kandhamal. By that time, the co- accused Basanta Kumar Mohanty was the Headmaster of the school as well as Secretary of the School Education Committee (SEC) and co- accused Kantheswar Pradhan was the President of the School Education Committee. Both of them entered into an agreement with the D.P.C., D.P.E.P., Kandhamal to execute the construct

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