* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment Reserved on: 24.02.2026 Judgment pronounced on: 10.03.2026 + CRL.A. 529/2003 KALI CHARAN & ANR. .....Appellants Through: Mr. H.K. Chaturvedi, Adv. for A-l.

Mr. Himanshu Sethi and Ms. Aishwarya Chhabra, Advocate for A-

2.

versus UOI & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Rajesh Kumar, SPP for CBI with Mr. Changez Khan and Mr. Siddharth Shekhar, Advocates for CBI.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE CHANDRASEKHARAN SUDHA

JUDGMENT

CHANDRASEKHARAN SUDHA, J.

1. This appeal under Section 374, 386(b)(i) read with Section

482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (the Cr.P.C.) has been filed by accused nos. 1 and 3 (A1 and A3) in C.C.No.11/1986 (New No. 331/1994) on the file of the Court of Special Judge, Delhi, challenging the conviction entered and sentence passed against them for the offences punishable under Section120-B read with Section 409 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (the IPC) and Sections 5(1)(c) and 5(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 (the PC Act) read with 120-B IPC. A1 has also been convicted under Sections 409 and 201 IPC.

2. The prosecution case is that during the period from August

1981 to March 1982, the accused persons, namely, A1 (Inspector), A2 (Assistant Engineer), A3 (Assistant Engineer), A5 (Mazdoor), being public servants and employees of the Delhi Electric Supply Undertaking (DESU), along with A6 and A4 (since deceased), PW2 (approver) and A8, entered into a criminal conspiracy to dishonestly and fraudulently misappropriate electrical materials belonging to DESU, by withdrawing the same from stores on the basis of forged and false store-issue dockets. It is alleged that 18 forged store issue dockets were prepared and used for this purpose and these dockets were falsely shown as issued from authorised stores, whereas in fact the materials were either drawn from unauthorised stores, or were misappropriated and sold, thereby causing wrongful loss to DESU and wrongful gain to the accused persons. The total value of the misappropriated material is ₹5,83,019.02/-. It is further alleged that A1, knowing or having reason to believe that the said dockets were forged, used them as genuine, committed criminal breach of trust, and screened himself and other accused from legal punishment by causing the disappearance of material evidence and falsification of records, including manipulation of store and register entries. Hence as per the final report/charge sheet, the accused persons were alleged to have been committed the offences punishable under Sections 120- B, 409, 467, 471 IPC and Sections 5(1)(c) & 5(1)(d) read with Section 5(2) of the PC Act.

3. On 25.03.1985, the law was set in motion on receipt of secret information, based on which crime, RC23/1985-DLI was registered with the Anti-Corruption Branch, CBI, New Delhi, Police Station and investigation into the crime started. On completion of the same, PW16 submitted the charge-sheet/ final report alleging commission of the offences punishable under the aforementioned offences.

4. Ext. PW5/A to PW5/C sanction orders for prosecuting A1, A2 and A3 andA5were accorded by PW5, the then Additional General Manager, DESU.

5. On receipt of summons when the accused persons appeared before the trial court, the court after complying with the formality contemplated under Section 207 Cr.P.C, on 12.11.1990, framed a Charge for the offences punishable under Sections 120-B read with 409 IPC against A1 to A5 and A7; Sections 5(1)(c), (d) and 5(2) of the PC Act against A1 to A3 and Sections 467, 471 and 201 IPC against A1, which was read over and explained to the accused persons to which they pleaded not guilty.

6. On behalf of the prosecution, PW1 to PW17 were examined and Ext. PW1/A - B, Ext. PW2/A-B, Ext. PW3/A-H, Ext. PW3/J-M, Ext. PW4/A to K, Ext. PW5/A-C, Ext. PW6/A, Ext. PW6/A1-A5, Ext. PW7/A-B, Ext. PW7/A-1 to PW7/A-3, Ext.

PW7/B, Ext. PW7/B-1 - B-2, Ext. PW8/A-B, Ext. PW9/A-B, Ext. PW9/B-1 to B-85, Ext. PW9/C, Ext. PW11/A-C, Ext. PW