Jharkhand High Court
Md. Tauheed vs Union Of India Through C.B.I on 8 April, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 209 of 2022
---
Md. Tauheed --- --- --- Appellant
Versus
Union of India through C.B.I --- --- --- Respondent
---
CORAM: The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh
Through: Video Conferencing
For the Appellant: Mr. Rakesh Kumar, Advocate
For the Respondent: Mr. Prashant Pallav, ASGI and
Mr. Navneet Sahay & Ms. Shivani Jaluka, A.C to ASGI
---
02/ 08.04.2022 Learned counsel for the appellant undertakes to remove the following
surviving defects by 13.04.2022.
9(i) Parental name of deponent at Affidavit differs from Aadhar copy. (Also at I.A.).
(ii) Age of appellant at page 1 of Vak. Differs.
(iii) Order of sentence may be corrected at aggrieved para and prayer para.
(iv) R.C. case no. may be properly stated at para-1 and prayer in Memo and also in
I.A.
(v) U/s in which conviction have been done, may be completely stated at para-1 and
prayer of Memo & I.A.
(vi) Tenure of imprisonment in default of payment of fine may be corrected at para-1
and same is missing at para-1 of I.A.
(vii) Rs. 15/- Welfare Stamp due at the affidavit of I.A
Office to place the file for inspection and removal of defects, on
requisition being made, within this time.
2. Admit.
3. Call for the lower court records in connection with R.C. Case No.
47(A)/1996-Pat from the court of learned Special Judge-V, C.B.I (A.H.D Scam
Cases), Ranchi.
4. 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. 2639/2022.
5. The sole Appellant stands convicted in connection with R.C. Case No.
47(A)/1996-Pat vide impugned judgment dated 15.02.2022 passed by the
Learned Special Judge-V, C.B.I (A.H.D 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) read with Section 13(1)(c)(d) of
Prevention of Corruption Act and has been sentenced to undergo R.I. for three
years with a fine of Rs. 1,00, 000/- and default sentence under section 120-B of
the Indian Penal Code; R.I for three years with a fine of Rs. 1,00,000/- and
default sentence under sections 420, 409, 467, 468, 471 and 477A of the Indian
Penal Code. No separate sentence has been awarded under Prevention of
Corruption Act, vide impugned order of sentence dated 15.02.2022. All the
sentences have been ordered to run concurrently.
6. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant (A-31) was
the partner of the Firm M/s Chhotanagpur Cattle Food Supply Company,
Ranchi whose day to day function was looked after by Md. Sayeed (A-26).
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant and other accused
persons have been held guilty for fraudulent withdrawals against fake supplies
of cattle feed to the Animal Husbandry Department. Learned Trial Court has
rendered an erroneous finding against the appellant, though prosecution
evidence does not support the allegation against the appellant. However, learned
Trial Court upon considering the lesser gravity of the charges has awarded
maximum sentence of three years under the relevant provisions of Indian Penal
Code and has been pleased to grant provisional bail to the appellant, which may
be confirmed.
7. 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.
8. Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for the appellant
and C.B.I and the facts and circumstances noted above and the nature and
gravity of offence and also sentence of three years awarded against the
appellant, 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.
9. I.A. No. 2639/2022 stands disposed of accordingly.
(Aparesh Kumar Singh, J)
Ranjeet/
