Back
2021 Supreme(Online)(KER) 47306
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
R. NARAYANA PISHARADI, J
THE STATE OF KERALA,
– Appellant
Versus
JAYAPRAKASH, – Respondent
Crl.Rev.Pet 674 2020
Sri.A.Rajesh,SPL.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,VACB
The judgment highlights that a prima facie case must be evaluated in discharge applications, requiring sufficient evidence to connect the accused with alleged criminal misconduct.
Headnote:
Discharge - Criminal Conspiracy - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Sections 239, 397, 401, 482), Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (Sections 13(1)(c), 13(1)(d), 13(2)), Indian Penal Code (Sections 120B, 218, 407, 468, 471, 477A) - The court interpreted the provisions concerning discharge and the elements required to establish conspiracy and misconduct under IPA and PC Act.
Fact of the Case:
The case involved multiple public servants accused of misappropriating government funds related to the delivery of bitumen. Charges were filed under the IPC and the Prevention of Corruption Act after an investigation revealed discrepancies in the delivery and documentation protocols followed by the accused parties.
Finding of the Court:
The court identified that for discharge applications, it must regard the prosecution's evidence as truthful to determine if a prima facie case existed. It concluded certain individuals lacked sufficient evidence connecting them to the alleged misconduct while others needed further review based on the materials presented.
Issues: Whether the trial court erred in discharging certain accused while dismissing discharge applications for others based on the sufficiency of evidence to support charges under the IPC and the Prevention of Corruption Act.
Ratio Decidendi: The court established that a mere suspicion does not suffice for criminal liability; a prima facie case must be shown with substantial evidence indicating a connection between accused actions and criminal allegations.
Final Decision: The court allowed some revision petitions, dismissing the orders of discharge in certain cases and permitting reconsideration of charges against others.
O R D E R
The orders passed by the Enquiry Commissioner and Special Judge, Kottayam in the applications for discharge filed by the accused in the case C.C.No.5/2014 are under challenge in these revision petitions filed under Section 397 read with 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'the Code') and the Criminal Miscellaneous Case filed under Section 482 of the Code.
2. There are altogether eleven accused in the case.
Accused No.1 was the Executive Engineer, Public Works Department (PWD), Roads Division, Alappuzha during the period from 02.12.2002 to 31.05.2003. Accused No.2 was the contractor engaged by the PWD for conveyance of packed bitumen from the Kochin Refineries Limited (KRL). Accused No.3 was the Assistant Engineer of the PWD Section, Alappuzha during the period from November 1999 to October 2004. Accused No.4 was the Assistant Engineer of the PWD Section, Cherthala during the period from 03.06.2002 to 31.01.2005. Accused No.5 was the Executive Engineer, PWD Roads Division, Alappuzha during the period from 27.06.2003 to 31.08.2005. Accused No.6 was the authorised agent of Accused No.2. Accused No.7 was the Divisional Accountant, PWD Roads Division, Alappuzha during the period from 24.09.2001 to 31.05.2005. Accused No.8 was the Assistant Executive Engineer (Technical Assistant), PWD Roads Division, Alappuzha during the period from 14.07.2003 to 30.09.2006. Accused No.9 was the Assistant Engineer (Works), PWD Roads Division, Alappuzha during the period from 17.04.2000 to 27.07.2006. Accused No.10 was the Junior Superintendent, PWD Roads Division, Alappuzha during the period from 03.07.2003 to 18.01.2007. Accused No. 11 was the Clerk in the Office of the PWD Roads Division, Alappuzha during the period from 02.06.2003 to 10.09.2009.
3. The summary of the allegations against the accused, as stated in the charge-sheet filed by the Vigilance and Anti-
Corruption Bureau (VACB) in the trial court, reads as follows:
“The accused A1 while working as Executive Engineer, Public Works Department, Roads Division, Alappuzha during the period from 02.12.2002 to 31.05.2003 and as such being public servant, abused his official position and entered into criminal conspiracy with A2 and A6, the conveyance contractor of packed bitumen and his authorized agent respectively for the period 2003-04 and in furtherance of the criminal conspiracy, five loads of packed bitumen vide invoice no.303057 dated 12.05.2003, 304050 dated 23.05.2003, 304228 dated 26.05.2003, 304674 dated 30.05.2003 and 306783 dated 26.06.2003 taken delivery from KRL, on behalf of Executive Engineer, Public Works Department Division, Alappuzha was dishonestly and fraudulently misappropriated wholly causing a loss of Rs.6,27,265.30/- to the Government and corresponding gain to the accused by illegal and corrupt means without any public interest. A5 who succeeded A1 as the EE, PWD Division, Alappuzha during the period 27.06.2003 to 31.08.2005 later on with malafide intention of obtaining pecuniary advantage to the said accused A2 and A6 conspired with A3 and A4 who worked as AE of the PWD Section, Alappuzha during the period 11/99 to 10/04 and AE, PWD Section, Cherthala during the period 03.06.2002 to 31.05.2005 respectively and also with A7 who worked as Divisional Accountant, Public Works Department, Roads Division, Alappuzha during the period from 24.09.01 to 31.05.05, A8 who worked as Assistant Executive Engineer (Technical Assistant), Public Works Department Roads Division, Alappuzha during 14.07.2003 to 30.09.2006, A9 who worked as Assistant Engineer (works), Public Works Department Roads Division, Alappuzha during the period from 17.04.2000 to 27.07.2006, A10 who worked as the Junior Superintendent, Public Works Department Roads Division, Alappuzha during the period from 03.07.2003 to 18.01.2007 and A11 who worked as the Clerk in the PWD Roads Division, Alappuzha during 02.06.2003 to 10.09.2009 and in furtherance of the said conspiracy hushed up the ma
