Back
2019 Supreme(All) 1047
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
RAMESH SINHA, J.
HCL Infosystem Ltd - Appellant
Versus
CBI/SCB/Lucknow - Respondent
Criminal Revision No. 55 of 2019, 306 of 2019, 756 of 2019, 754 of 2019
Decided On : 23-05-2019
Somya Chaturvedi, Adv., Gopal S. Chatruvedi, Adv., Gyan Prakash, Adv., Anurag Sharma, Adv., Avanish Mishra, Adv.
The correctness of the allegations against the accused should be decided only in the trial, and criminal proceedings cannot be quashed at the initial stage.
Headnote:
Criminal Conspiracy - Prevention of Corruption Act - 120-B/409 IPC, 13 (2) read with section 13 (1) (d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 - The court discussed the allegations of criminal conspiracy, misappropriation of funds, and fraudulent activities under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, and the Indian Penal Code. The court analyzed the evidence presented by the CBI and the arguments of the defense, ultimately concluding that the charges against the revisionists were justified and dismissing the criminal revisions.
Fact of the Case:
The case involved allegations of criminal conspiracy, misappropriation of funds, and fraudulent activities under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, and the Indian Penal Code. The revisionists, including HCL Infosystems Ltd., were accused of involvement in the misappropriation of funds related to the purchase/installment of computers and peripherals.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the charges against the revisionists were justified and that the trial court had rightly proceeded to frame charges against them. The court emphasized that the correctness of the allegations against the accused should be decided only in the trial and that criminal proceedings cannot be quashed at the initial stage.
Issues: The issues revolved around the sufficiency of evidence to establish the alleged offenses, the consideration of discharge application grounds by the trial court, and the applicability of legal principles in the context of framing charges and proceeding with the trial.
Ratio Decidendi: The court applied the test of prima facie case and emphasized that the correctness of the allegations against the accused should be decided only in the trial. It also highlighted that at the stage of framing of charge, no mini trial is required regarding the genuineness and truthfulness of the allegations.
Final Decision: The criminal revisions lacked merit and were accordingly dismissed by the court, which upheld the charges against the revisionists and emphasized that the correctness of the allegations should be decided only in the trial.
JUDGMENT :
Ramesh Sinha, J.
Criminal revision Nos. 55 of 2019 and 306 of 2019 have been preferred against the judgment and order dated 19.12.2018 passed by Special Judge (Prevention of Corruption Act), C.B.I. Ghaziabad framing charges in Special Case No.15/2013 in RC No. 1(A)/2012/CBI/SCB/LKO (C.B.I. Vs. G.K. Batra & others) and the impugned order dated 28.11.2018 whereby the learned Judge has rejected the discharge application filed by the revisionists in the aforesaid case.
2. So far as Criminal Revision Nos. 754 of 2019 and 756 of 2019 preferred by co-accused Virendra Goel and Neeraj Upadhyay are concerned, these revisionists have challenged the impugned order dated 28.11.2018 by which their discharge application has been rejected in the aforementioned case.
3. One of the co-accused G.K. Batra who was a public servant in M/s. Shreetron India Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as 'SIL') died during the pendency of trial, hence, his trial has been ordered to be abated by the trial court.
4. As all the four criminal revisions arise out of common judgment and order of the trial court, hence, they are being heard and decided by this Court vide a common judgment and order.
5. In pursuance of order dated 15.11.2011 of this Court, a preliminary inquiry was conducted which revealed commission of cognizable offences in the purchase/installment of 951 computers and its peripherals and pursuant to the said preliminary inquiry, FIR No. 0532012A0001 dated 02.01.2012 was registered under section 120-B/409 IPC and sections 13 (2) read with section 13 (1) (d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 against G.K. Batra, Managing Director, Shreetron India Ltd., Virender Goel, proprietor, M/s. Axis Marketing and Neeraj Upadhyay, proprietor, M/s. Radhey Shyam Enterprises and other unknown persons for criminal conspiracy and misappropriation of Rs. 2.94 crores and approximately by showing undue favour to private firms. Chargesheet No. 01/2012 dated 04.04.2012 was submitted before Special Judge (Central), Anti Corruption, CBI, Lucknow against G.K. Batra, Virender Goel and Neeraj Upadhyay under sections 120-B/409/420 IPC and sections 13 (2) read with section 13 (1) (d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. On 20.11.2014, a supplementary chargesheet no. 01/2014 was filed by CBI before Special Judge (NRHM), Anti Corruption, CBI, Ghaziabad under sections 120-B/409/420 IPC and sections 13 (2) read with section 13 (1) (d) of P.C. Act against the revisionist HCL Infosystems Ltd. and/or its employees for being involved in the present crime.
6. The brief facts of the case are that the revisionist company HCL Infosystem Ltd and Vimal Garg are facing trial in the aforesaid case and after submission of the chargesheet against the revisionists, an application for discharge was moved on behalf of the revisionists before the trial court and the same was rejected on 28.11.2018 and the trial court framed charges against the revisionists by the impugned order dated 19.12.2018 for the offences in question.
7. Heard Sri Gopal S. Chaturvedi, Senior Advocate assisted by Ms. Somya Chaturvedi, learned counsel for the revisionists in Criminal Revision Nos. 55 of 2019 and 306 of 2019, Sri P. Chakravarty, and Sri Anurag Sharma, learned counsel appearing for the revisionists in Criminal Revision Nos. 754 of 2019 and 756 of 2019, Sri Gyan Prakash, learned counsel for CBI and perused the record.
8. Sri Gopal S. Chaturvedi, learned counsel for the revisionists has submitted that as per the chargesheet dated 04.04.2012, it is apparent that the allegations levelled pertains to periods prior to floating of the tenders and no accusation has been made either against HCL Infosystems Ltd. and/or its employees. He submitted that the accusations are against G.K. Batra who on 16.07.2009 prior to initiation of tender process is alleged to have verbally ordered his Manager (Accounts) to issue a cheque for making payment of Rs. 20,00,000/- to M/s. Axis Marketing whose proprietor was Virender Goel and paym
