Sheshrao S/O Shankarrao Khade vs State Of Mah. Thr.Police Station ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 11465 Bom

Judgment                                                                   apl1000

                                    1


         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY :
                   NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR.



               CRIMINAL APPLICATION No. 1000 OF 2021.


Sheshrao s/o Shankarrao Khade,
Aged about 70 years, Occupation -
Retired, resident of Sawali,
Ashiyad Colony, Shegaon, Naka Road,
Amravati, Taluq and District
Amravati.                                     ...            APPLICANT.

                                VERSUS

State of Maharashtra,
through Police Station Officer,
Kotwali, District Amravati.                  ...       NON-APPLICANT.

                             ---------------------
             Mr. Abhay Sambre, Advocate for the Applicant.
           Shri H.D. Dubey, A.P.P. for the Non-applicant/State.
                            -----------------------

                                   CORAM : VINAY JOSHI, J.


CLOSED FOR JUDGMENT ON                        14.07.2022.
JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED ON                        11.11.2022.

JUDGMENT :

Being aggrieved and dissatisfied by the order dated

Rgd.

Judgment apl1000

16.07.2019 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Amravati by

which rejection of discharge application vide order dated 27.11.2017

has been confirmed, is the subject matter of challenge in this

application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure

read with Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India.

2. The applicant is arrayed as accused no.8 in Crime

No.243/2016 registered with Police Station City Kotwali, Amravati

for the offence punishable under Sections 177, 182[a], 193, 196,

199, 200, 420, 463, 465, 467, 468, 471, 34 and 120-B of the Indian

Penal Code. Initially name of the applicant was not mentioned in

the first information report, however, during investigation his role

was ascertained, on which supplementary statements have been

recorded and charge sheet has been filed.

3. Claiming absence of material to proceed further, the

applicant has applied to the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate,

Amravati vide Exh.40 for discharge in terms of Section 239 of the

Code of Criminal Procedure. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate

Rgd.

Judgment apl1000

discarded the submissions advanced by the applicant about absence

of sufficiency of material and declined to discharge the applicant.

The said rejection order was carried by the applicant to the

Revisional Court in Criminal Revision No.1/2018. The Revisional

Court has confirmed the order of rejection of discharge vide order

dated 16.07.2019, which is impugned herein.

4. Heard learned Counsel appearing for the parties at length

and perused entire documents, including charge sheet, which runs

into hundreds of pages. By their consent Criminal Application is

taken up for final disposal.

Admit.

5. It is the case of applicant that both the Courts below

failed to consider the grounds claiming discharge. According to the

applicant, his name was not included in the first information report,

however, belatedly after two years, he has been falsely implicated in

the crime. It is submitted that the applicant was working as a

Project Director, and was simply duty bound to forward the project

Rgd.

Judgment apl1000

proposal to the Government of India, through State Government. He

has no knowledge about the alleged fraudulent activities. The project

proposal forwarded by the applicant was never finalized, but, it was

later on canceled. There was no monetary transaction, meaning

thereby no financial loss was caused to the government. There is no

material to construe that the applicant participated or connived with

the members of the Society in fraudulent activities. The material

produced by the prosecution is insufficient which makes the

applicant entitled for discharge.

6. The non-applicant / State has resisted the application by

filing reply-affidavit dated 17.12.2021. It is contended that the

applicant had conscious knowledge regarding the fraud and forgery.

He being a Project Director, had knowledge about both Societies.

Knowingly he has forwarded the proposal by certifying the

genuineness of the documents, and thus, has played a major role in

the entire episode. The material collected during investigation not

only makes out a strong suspicion, but, a triable case which may lead

to his conviction.

Rgd.

Judgment apl1000

7. At the instance of a report dated 18.03.2008, lodged by

the then Project Director, District Rural Development Agency

(DRDA), a crime came to be registered for the aforesaid offences. It

was briefly contended that there were two societies, registered under

the Societies Registration Act, 1860 as well as under the Bombay

Public Trust Act, 1950, which were namely - [1] Shri Govind Prabhu

Gramin Yuva Vikas Sanstha, having registration No.2149 dated

28.06.1089 (old society), and [2] Shri Govind Prabhu Gramin Vikas

Sanstha having registration No. 674/05 dated 24.08.2005 (new

society). The accused were the office bearers of the old as well as

new society. They have conspired together and by fabricating

documents of old society had secured a special project from the

Central Government, Ministry of Rural Development under Swarna

Jayanti Gram Swarojgar Yojna in the name of the new society, for

gaining financial benefits to the tune of Rs.13.90 Crores. At the

time of execution of the agreement of new new society, they have

tendered registration certificate of the year 2000, which was found

to be suspicious, on which an enquiry was made. It was revealed

Rgd.

Judgment apl1000

that the document of the old society have been fraudulently used for

the purpose of new society and by only deleting the word "Yuva", a

scene was created about experience and other compliances of new

society.

8. The applicant was the Project Director, who has

forwarded the proposal of old, as well as the new society, meaning

thereby he was well aware about the forged and fabricated

document. Prima facie the applicant has participated in connivance

with the members of the Society and played a fraud on the

government. The charge sheet bears additional document named as

"Ghatna Kram' along with the supplementary statements of the

informant and others, showing the role played by the applicant. It is

primely alleged that the applicant has forwarded the proposal of new

society by concealing the change in the name of the old society, and

by use of old documents. The applicant was Project Director of

DRDA in between 25.07.2002 to 31.05.2006 i.e. when the second

proposal was submitted.

Rgd.

Judgment apl1000

9. The learned counsel appearing for the applicant has

primely argued that applicants' name was not mentioned in the first

information report, however, by deceitful means he has been

involved in the case after a period of two years. It is his submission

that merely because the applicant's son was the member of the new

society, on mere suspicion it has been concluded that the applicant

has knowledge about the mischief played while forwarding the

proposal. According to the applicant, he being the Project Director,

was not supposed to verify the documents, but, he has merely

forwarded the proposal to the Government, which was not accepted.

The learned Counsel took me through various documents and

correspondence to contend that the Ministry has examined the

proposal and returned to the State Government for reconsideration,

meaning thereby it was not rejected.

10. It reveals from the documents that the applicant was the

Project Director when both proposals were forwarded. Admittedly

son of the applicant was member of the new society. It is a matter

of evidence to find out whether the applicant had conscious

Rgd.

Judgment apl1000

knowledge about creation of new society by making artificial change

i.e. eyewash about new establishment. It is apparent that the

government has floated a welfare scheme for the upliftment of

downtrodden person under which the proposal was sent involving

crores of rupees. Prima facie it reveals that various documents of

old society have been used to procure the work by making artificial

change. Both the Courts below have observed that in Project

Provisional Committee's Meeting dated 10.02.2006, the applicant

was present and had certified the credentials and competence of the

new society. The minutes of the meting were said to be filed on

record. Thus, prima facie it is apparent that the applicant through

whom the entire project was forwarded, has played an active role in

forwarding the proposal with conscious knowledge of creating a

scene of an independent society.

11. While considering the application for discharge the Court

is not expected to apply the standard which are generally used at the

final stage of the trial. It is settled law that even a strong suspicion

is sufficient to frame the charge. Though the Court is empowered to

Rgd.

Judgment apl1000

shift the material to a limited extent, detail scanning is not necessary.

The investigating agency has recorded several statements, as well as

collected minutes of the meeting which prima facie discloses

applicant's involvement. Moreover, at the time of forwarding both

proposals, the applicant was admittedly a Project Director. Besides

that, his son was a member of the new society, which also goes

against his stand of absence of knowledge. Scanning of entire

material un-erreingly points out that there are grounds for

presuming that the applicant has committed an offence. Certainly it

is not a case that the charge is groundless. Both the Courts below

have appropriately considered the available material, and therefore,

the impugned order calls no interference. Criminal Application is,

therefore, rejected.

JUDGE

Rgd.