Jharkhand High Court
Sanjay Kumar vs The Union Of India Through S.P on 6 May, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 276 of 2022
---
Sanjay Kumar --- --- Appellant
Versus
The Union of India through S.P, C.B.I (AHD Scam) --- Respondent
---
CORAM: The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh
Through: Video Conferencing
For the Appellant: Mr. Kumar Anshuman, Advocate
For the Respondent: Ms. Shivani Jaluka, A.C to ASGI
---
04/ 06.05.2022 Admit.
2. 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.
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
and extended by order dated 13.04.2022 through I.A. No. 3213/2022.
4. 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. 10,000/- and default sentence under section 120-B of
the Indian Penal Code and R.I for three years with a fine of Rs. 10,000/- and
default sentence under sections 420, 409, 467, 468, 471 and 477A of the Indian
Penal Code, but 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.
5. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant (A-81)
was the proprietor of M/s Hindustan Pharmaceuticals. As per the allegation
made by the CBI, he had raised fake bill of Rs. 2.00 lakh and received the said
amount. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that considering the lesser
gravity of the offence, learned Trial Court has however, imposed sentence of
only three years under the provisions of I.P.C and granted provisional bail vide
order dated 15.02.2022 and extended it for one month vide order dated
13.04.2022, which may be confirmed.
6. Learned counsel for the CBI has opposed the prayer. She submits that
the appellant has also been responsible for fraudulently receiving payment
without actual supplies.
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 R.C. Case No. 47(A)/1996-Pat
is confirmed, subject to deposit of Rs. 10,000/- 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 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. 3213/2022 stands disposed of accordingly.
(Aparesh Kumar Singh, J)
Ranjeet/
