Jharkhand High Court
Dr. Bijayaeshwari Prasad Sinha vs Union Of India Through on 9 October, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 576 of 2023
Dr. Bijayaeshwari Prasad Sinha
@ Bijayeshwari Prasad Sinha
@ Dr. Bijayeshwari Prasad Sinha ..... ... Appellant
Versus
Union of India through
Superintendent of Police, CBI,
(AHD Scam), Ranchi. ..... ... Respondent
--------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
------
For the Appellant : Mr. Rishi Pallava, Advocate.
For the CBI : Mr. Anil Kumar, A.S.G.I.
: Ms Chandana Kumari, A.C. to A.S.G.I.
------
I.A. No. 8146 of 2023.
03/ 09.10.2023 Heard Mr. Rishi Pallava, learned counsel appearing for the
appellant and Mr. Anil Kumar, learned A.S.G.I. appearing on behalf of
the C.B.I.
2 I.A. No. 8146 of 2023 has been filed for suspension of
sentence of the appellant namely Dr. Bijayaeshwari Prasad Sinha @
Bijayeshwari Prasad Sinha @ Dr. Bijayeshwari Prasad Sinha and release
him on bail, during the pendency of this appeal.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that
the appellant is convicted along with others in connection with R.C.
Case No. 48(A)/1996 for the offences under Section 120-B read with
Sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 477-A of the Indian Penal Code and
also under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 of the Indian Penal Code and
sentenced to undergo R.I. for four years with fine of Rs. 36,00,000/- for
the offence under Section 120(B) read with Sections 409, 420, 467, 468,
471, 477-A of the Indian Penal Code and a common sentence for all
other IPC offences as R.I. for four years and fine of Rs. 10,000/- and in
default of payment of fine, further SI for six months in each Section has
been imposed. All these sentences were directed to run concurrently
and the period undergone shall be set off has been ordered.
4. Mr. Rishi Pallava, learned counsel appearing for the
appellant submits that the learned trial court has committed grave error
in passing the impugned judgment against the appellant, as admittedly
the supply order had been issued from the office of District Animal
Husbandry Officer and the materials and medicines had been supplied to
the said office itself by the suppliers including the appellant, but there is
no evidence on record to suggest that the materials and medicines,
which had been supplied by the appellant according to the supply order,
has not been received in the District Animal Husbandry Office and in
absence of such proof of non-supply, the entire allegation against the
appellant is misconceived one, however, the appellant has been
convicted. He submits that the appellant has already undergone half of
the sentence, as he was in custody 21.05.1999 to 23.08.1999 and further
from 28.08.2006 to 17.06.2008 and thereafter from the date of
conviction i.e. from 28.08.2023 to till date. He further submits this
sentence is on the warrant itself in the present case and in view of that
he submits that sentence against the appellant may kindly be suspended.
5. Mr. Anil Kumar, learned A.S.G.I. appearing for the CBI
submits that the case against the appellant has been well discussed in
Para-46 of the judgment. He submits that the evidences are available on
record to suggest that the appellant was involved in the said scam and
that's why the learned trial court has rightly passed the judgment,
however, he does not dispute the period already undergone by the
appellant in the present case.
6. In view of the above submissions of learned counsel for the
parties and further looking into the custody period, it appears that the
appellant has already completed his half of the sentence, I am inclined to
suspend the sentence of the appellant by enlarging him on bail.
Accordingly, the appellant, named above, be released on bail, during the
pendency of this appeal, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 50,000/-
(Rupees Fifty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to
the satisfaction of Learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-VII-cum-
Special Judge CBI-II (AHD), Ranchi, in connection with R.C. Case No.
48(A)/1996, subject to deposit of the 20% of the fine amount,
considering the ailment of the appellant, before the learned 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 bailers shall not change their address or mobile
numbers without permission of the learned Trial Court.
7. I.A. No. 8146 of 2023 is allowed in the above terms and
disposed of accordingly.
(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)
Amitesh/-
