Jharkhand High Court
Dr. Shivnandan Prasad vs Vrs on 6 May, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Criminal Appeal (SJ) No. 138 of 2022
Dr. Shivnandan Prasad ............Appellant
Vrs.
Union of India through CBI .......... Respondent
.......
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE APARESH KUMAR SINGH
For the Appellant : Mr. Navin Kumar, Advocate
For the CBI : M/s Prashant Pallav, ASGI, Navneet Sahay
and Shivani Jaluka, A.C. to ASGI
06/06.05.2022 Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for
the CBI on the prayer for suspension of sentence made through I.A. No.
2275 of 2022.
2. 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 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) r/w Section
13(1)(d) of the P.C. Act and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 4 years with a
fine of Rs. 50,000/- u/s 120 B I.P.C.; R.I. for 4 years with a fine of
Rs.50,000/- u/s 420,409,467,468,471 and 477A of the IPC and R.I. for 4
years with a fine of Rs. 1 Lakh u/s 13(2) r/w section 13(1)(d) of the P.C
Act and default sentences. All the sentences were directed to run
concurrently.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant (A-143)
was the Assistant Director, Poultry, Jamshedpur during the subject period
of the scam. The role of this appellant along with other veterinary
doctors has been discussed from para 110 onwards in the impugned
judgment. His name is at serial no. 21 in both the tables furnished under
para 110. The CBI had alleged that the appellant had falsely certified 70
CNC bills against the supply of feed, which led to fraudulent withdrawal
of Rs.4,55,23,795/- by the suppliers on fake allotment letters. It is
submitted that the learned CBI Court has arrived at an erroneous finding
without appreciation of the materials on record and the stand of the
appellant. Appellant has however remained in custody for 2 years 2
months and 22 days as on date against the maximum sentence of 4 years
awarded under both provisions of I.P.C and P.C Act. Therefore, appellant
may be enlarged on bail by suspending his sentence on the principles of
parity as has been applied by this Court in cases of similar convicts /
appellants under Fodder Scam cases, not only in connection with the
instant R.C. Case but convictions under other R.C. cases also.
4. Learned counsel for the CBI has opposed the prayer on merits.
She submits that appellant was also one of the veterinary doctor in the
Animal Husbandry Department under the Regional Directorate, Ranchi
upon whose false certification, huge fraudulent withdrawal were made
against fake supplies and fake allotment orders. The CBI has been able
to establish the charges both on oral and documentary evidence. Learned
counsel for the CBI however submits that as per the joint inspection of
record by learned counsel for the appellant and the representative of the
CBI, appellant has completed half of the custody i.e., 2 years 2 months
and 22 days against the maximum sentence of 4 years awarded under the
provisions of IPC and PC Act.
5. 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 under gone by the appellant in
connection with the instant R.C. Case 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 against the
maximum sentence of 4 years 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 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 the fine amount of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty
Five Thousand) 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
bailers shall not change their address or mobile nos. without permission
of the learned Trial Court.
6. I.A. No. 2275 of 2022 stands disposed of accordingly.
(Aparesh Kumar Singh, J.)
A.Mohanty
