Dr. Jitendra Kr. Srivastava @ ... vs Vrs
2022 Latest Caselaw 1427 Jhar

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                    Criminal Appeal (SJ) No. 212 of 2022
     Dr. Jitendra Kr. Srivastava @ Jitendra Kumar Srivatava
            ............Appellant
                                Vrs.
     The Central Bureau of Investigation AHD Ranchi       .......... Respondent
                                       .......

     CORAM:       HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE APARESH KUMAR SINGH

     For the Appellant         : Mr. Kripa Shankar Nanda, Advocate
     For the CBI               : M/s Prashant Pallav, ASGI, Navneet Sahay,
                                 and Shivani Jaluka, A.C. to ASGI

02/08.04.2022     Admit.

2. Call for the Lower Court Record in connection with R.C. Case No. 47(A)/1996-PAT from the court of Learned Special Judge-V, CBI (AHD Scam Cases), Ranchi.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant has prayed for confirmation of provisional bail granted to the appellant for 60 days vide order dated 15.02.2022 through I.A. No. 2803/2022.

4. Appellant stands convicted in connection with R.C. Case No. 47(A)/1996 - PAT vide impugned judgment of conviction dated 15.02.2022 and order of sentence of the same date passed by the Learned Special Judge-V, CBI (AHD Scam Cases), Ranchi for the offences under sections 120(B) read with sections 420,409,467,468,471 and 477A of the Indian Penal Code and section 13(2) of P.C Act r/w section 13(1)(d) of P.C Act and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 3 years with a fine of Rs. 50,000/- under Section 120B of I.P.C; R.I for 3 years with a fine of Rs. 50,000/-/- under Section 420,409,467,468,471 and 477A of the Indian Penal Code and R.I for 3 years with a fine of Rs. 1,00,000/- under section 13(2) read with section 13(1)(d) of P.C. Act and default sentences. All the sentences were directed to run concurrently.

5. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant was the Project Officer, Hotwar, Ranchi and Additional Director Purchase, Poultry Farm, Khunti during the subject period in question. He was the countersigning authority. Case of the appellant has been discussed at paragraph-110 of the impugned judgment. However, learned Trial Court upon considering the less gravity of the charges has awarded maximum sentence of three years under the relevant provisions of Indian Penal Code and Prevention of Corruption Act and has been pleased to grant provisional bail to the appellant, which may be confirmed.

6. Learned counsel for the CBI has opposed the prayer. He submits that the prosecution has been able to successfully establish the charges against the appellant and other accused persons on the basis of oral and documentary evidence.

7. Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for the appellant and C.B.I and the facts and circumstances noted above, provisional bail granted to the appellant vide order dated 15.02.2022 by the Court of learned Special Judge-V, C.B.I. (AHD Scam Cases), Ranchi in connection with R.C. Case No. 47(A)/1996-PAT is confirmed, subject to deposit of 50% of fine amount imposed by the learned Trial Court and if not wanted in connection with any other case. The appellant would not leave the country without permission of the learned Trial Court. He would also submit his passport, if any, before the learned Trial Court and the appellant and his bailors shall not change their address or mobile nos. without permission of the learned Trial Court.

8. I.A. No. 2803/2022 stands disposed of accordingly.

(Aparesh Kumar Singh, J.)

A.Mohanty