Jharkhand High Court
Sudhir Kumar Sharan vs Union Of India Through Cbi on 13 October, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 735 of 2023
Sudhir Kumar Sharan ..... ... Appellant
Versus
Union of India through CBI ..... ... Respondent
--------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
------
For the Appellant : Mr. Ashish Kumar, Advocate.
For the CBI : Mr. Anil Kumar,A.S.G.I.
: Mr. N.K. Parthsarthi, A.C. to A.S.G.I.
------
02/ 13.10.2023 Admit.
2. Issue Notice.
3. Call for the Lower Court Records.
4. Mr. Anil Kumar, learned A.S.G.I. appearing for the CBI
waives notice on behalf of the CBI.
I.A. No. 9319 of 2023.
5. The sole appellant Sudhir Kumar Sharan, by way of the
aforesaid I.A., prays for confirmation of provisional bail granted to him
for 60 days by order dated 28.08.2023, passed in R.C. Case No.
48(A)/1996 by the learned Special Judge-V, CBI-II (AHD), Ranchi.
6. 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 with R.I. for
three years and fine of Rs. 1,00,000/- and under Sections 420, 467, 468,
471 of the Indian Penal Code a common sentence for all IPC Sections
R.I. for three years and fine of Rs. 10,000/- and in default of payment of
fine, further SI for six months in each Section. All these sentences were
directed to run concurrently and the period undergone shall be set off has
been ordered.
7. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that
the appellant being the proprietor of M/s Katyayani Enterprises, Ranchi,
has received supply orders issued by the accused Gauri Shankar Prasad,
DAHO, Ranchi for filter papers, glass slides (blue star), leather hand
bags of 14", casting ropes and thermometers. He further submits that
during the period 1991-92, the appellant raised bill worth Rs. 4,98,760/-
against the aforesaid supply orders issued by accused Gauri Shankar
Prasad, DAHO, Ranchi. He further submits that the learned trial court
ought to have considered that the bills were not proved forged, rather the
appellant being the supplier have only raised the bills vide Ext-
303/25817 to 303/25916 against the supply order issued to him by Gauri
Shankar Prasad, DAHO, Ranchi.
8. Mr. Anil Kumar, learned A.S.G.I. appearing for the CBI
submits that the case of the appellant has been discussed in paras-43 and
75 of the judgment. He submits that the learned trial court has passed the
said judgment after looking into the evidence available on record and in
such type of cases, leniency is not required. However, he does not
dispute that the appellant has been imposed the maximum sentence of
three years and has been granted provisional bail.
9. In view of the above submissions of learned counsel for the
appellant, learned counsel for the CBI as well as further considering the
facts and circumstances discussed hereinabove, the provisional bail
granted to the appellant vide order dated 28.08.2023 passed by the
learned Special Judge-V, CBI-II (AHD), Ranchi, in R.C Case No.
48(A)/1996, is confirmed, subject to deposit of 50% of the fine amount
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 bailors shall not change
their addresses or mobile numbers without permission of the learned
Trial Court.
10. The aforesaid I.A. stands disposed of.
(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)
Amitesh/-
