The court upheld convictions for conspiracy under the Prevention of Corruption Act but granted probation considering the advanced age of offenders and time elapsed since the offence, emphasizing discretion in sentencing and the need for reformative justice.

JUDGMENT :

SUBHASH VIDYARTHI, J.

1. Heard Shri Abhinav Srivastava, the learned counsel for the appellant and Shri Anurag Kumar Singh, the learned counsel for the respondent- C.B.I.

2. The instant appeal was filed in the year 1998 by five appellants, namely, (i) Ram Narain Mehrotra, (ii) Jageshwar Prasad Mehrotra, (iii) Onkar Nath Mehrothra (iv) Nirankar Nath Mehrotra and (v) Smt. Neera Mehrotra, challenging the validity of a judgment and order dated 30.07.1998 passed by the Special Judge, Anti Corruption (West), U.P., Lucknow in Criminal Case No.02 of 1979, whereby the appellants have been convicted for the offence under Section 120-B I.P.C. read with Section 5(2) read with Section 5(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 and have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay Rs.4,00,000/- as fine.

3. The appeal was admitted by means of an order dated 12.09.1998, the appellants were ordered to be released on bail and the payment of fine was also stayed pending disposal of the appeal.

4. During pendency of the appeal, appellant Nos.1, 2 and 4 have died and the appeal survives only in respect of the appellant Nos.3 and 5.

5. Briefly stated, the prosecution case arises out of alleged banking frauds committed by three firms during the year 1972 to 1975. One of the three firms- M/s Guru Prasad Ram Prasad, Kanpur, was reconstituted in the year 1965 and its partners were Ram Narain Mehrotra, Guru Prasad Mehrotra, Jageshwar Prasad Mehrotra and Nirankar Nath Mehrotra. The second firm- M/s MT and Company was constituted on 08.01.1972 and its active partners were Ram Narain Mehrotra and Anil Kumar Tandon, Onkar Nath Mehrotra was Manager of this firm. The third firm was M/s MT Agencies, Lucknow. Ram Narain Mehrotra, Anil Kumar Tandon, Smt. Prem Kumari Mehrotra and Smt. Neera Mehrotra were active partners of this firm and the aforesaid Onkar Nath Mehrotra was the Manager of this firm also.

6. Another accused B. N. Tandon was working as a Head Clerk in State Bank of India, Main Branch during the year 1973 to 1975. Yet another accused M. L. Agarwal was working as a Head Clerk in DDRR Section of the Main Branch, State Bank of India during the period October 1968 to January 1973 and thereafter he was promoted to the post of Officer Grade-II, but he continued to work on the same post till April 1973 and he also used to perform duties similar to that of co-accused B. N. Tandon.

7. Some fraudulent transactions came to light during an inspection of the bank made by an Officer on Special Duty, on the basis whereof three FIRs were lodged. During investigation, it came to light that out of 35 lost cheques, 8 cheques had been made to disappear by co-accused persons B. N. Tandon and M. L. Agarwal. 3 cheques related to firm M/s Guru Prasad Ram Prasad and M/s MT Agencies, 10 of the 25 lost cheques were received in branches of State Bank of India at Kanpur. It was alleged that co-accused B. N. Tandon had misplaced the cheques under conspiracy with other co- accused persons and B. N. Tandon had been seen going to meet Ram Narain Mehrotra in firm- M/s Guru Prasad Ram Prasad, Chowk, Kanpur.

8. The trial Court held that sanction for prosecution of co-accused M. L. Agarwal was valid but the sanction for prosecution of B. N. Tandon was not valid. Regarding the offence of criminal conspiracy alleged against the partners of the three firms, it was established that they had issued the cheques which establish that they were active partners of the firms. The amount for which the cheques had been issued were not available in the accounts of the firms. The accused persons made interpolations and