Jharkhand High Court
Ravi Nandan Kumar Sinha @ Ravi ... vs The Union Of India Through Central ... on 8 April, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 143 of 2022
----
Ravi Nandan Kumar Sinha @ Ravi Kumar Sinha .............. Appellant
Versus
The Union of India through Central Bureau of
Investigation ............... Respondent
---
CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh
---
Through: Video Conferencing
--
For the Appellant : Mr. Prakash Kumar Sahay, Advocate,
For the Resp.-CBI : Mr. Prashant Pallav, ASGI
M/s. Navneet Sahay, Shivani Jhaluka, A.C to A.S.G.I
---
03/08.04.2022 Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the CBI
on the prayer for suspension of sentence made through I.A No. 2244 of 2022.
Sole 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 dated 21.02.2022 passed by learned Special Judge-V, CBI,
(A.H.D. Scam Cases), Ranchi for the offences under Section 120(B) read with
Sections 420, 409, 467, 468, 471 and 477A of the Indian Penal Code and Section
13(2) r/w section 13(1)(c) (d) of Prevention of Corruption Act and sentenced to
undergo R.I for 4 years with a fine of Rs. 10,000/- under Section 120B of I.P.C.
and R.I. for 5 years with a fine of Rs. 10 Lakhs under Sections 420, 409, 467,
468, 471 and 477A of the Indian Penal Code and default sentences. All the
sentences were directed to run concurrently.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant (A-24), was
the proprietor of M/s. A Traders. Case of the appellant has been discussed by
learned trial court at paras 164 to 168. It is submitted that the appellant's firm had
made supplies to Animal Husbandry Department during the period 1990-91 to
1994-95 worth Rs. 5.00 Crore 77.00 Lakhs and odd and allegedly received
fraudulent payments of Rs. 43,22,582/-. It is submitted that learned trial court has
rendered erroneous finding, though the prosecution has not been able to establish
the charges beyond shadow of all doubts. Learned counsel for the appellant
further submits that the appellant has remained in custody for 38 months, which
has been mentioned at paragraphs 8,9,10,11 and 12 of instant I.A. Therefore, he
may be enlarged on bail by suspending the sentence.
Learned counsel for the CBI has opposed the prayer. He submits that the
prosecution has been able to prove the charges against the appellant on the basis
of both oral and documentary evidence. However, learned counsel for the CBI
states on instructions that the appellant has completed about 2 years 3 months 26
days of custody till 31st March, 2022, which would come to more than half of the
sentence awarded.
I have considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties
and taken note of the materials relied upon from the lower court record and also
the period of custody undergone by the appellant in connection with the instant
R.C Case No. No. 47(A)/1996-PAT. Having regard to the totality of facts and
circumstances and that the appellant has remained in custody for more than half
of the sentence awarded in the instant case, I am inclined to grant the privilege of
suspension of sentence to the appellant by enlarging him on bail.
Accordingly, let the above-named appellant be released on bail,
during the pendency of this appeal, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 25,000/-
(Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to
the satisfaction of learned Special Judge-V, CBI (AHD Scam Cases), Ranchi in
connection with R.C Case No. 47(A)/1996-PAT, subject to deposit of fine
amount of Rs. 01 Lakh in the Court below 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.
I.A No. 2244 of 2022 stands disposed of accordingly.
(Aparesh Kumar Singh, J)
Jk/
