Jharkhand High Court
Jitendra Prasad Singh vs The Union Of India Through Cbi on 29 September, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 629 of 2023
Jitendra Prasad Singh ..... ... Appellant
Versus
The Union of India through CBI ..... ... Respondent
--------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
------
For the Petitioner : Mr. Vishnu Kumar Sharma, Advocate.
: Mr. Anup Kumar Agrawal, Advocate.
For the CBI : Mr. Anil Kumar,A.S.G.I.
: Ms Chandana Kumari, A.C. to A.S.G.I.
------
02/ 29.09.2023 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. 8504 of 2023.
5. The sole appellant Jitendra Prasad Singh [A-168], 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 Additional Judicial Commissioner-VII-cum-
Special Judge, 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 punishable under Sections 409, 420,
467, 468, 471, 477-A of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 120-B
read with Sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 477-A of the Indian
Penal Code later on dated 28.08.2023 sentenced the appellant under
Section 120-B read with Sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 477-A of
the Indian Penal Code R.I. for three years and with fine of Rs. 90,000/- a
common sentence for all IPC offences i.e. under Sections 420, 467, 468
and 471 of the Indian Penal Code R.I. for three years with fine of Rs.
10,000/- further ordered that 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 CBI, after investigation, has submitted chargesheet including the
appellant Jitendra Prasad Singh [A-168] alleging therein that he being
the proprietor of M/s Shri Nath Pharma, Patna raised the false supplier's
bills worth Rs. 4,95,500/- on behalf of the said firm towards the
purported supply of medicines. He further submits that the defense of the
appellant is that he is quite innocent and has falsely been implicated in
the case by the CBI. He further submits that the from the evidence of the
CBI and documents, no case is made out against the appellant and he is
not having any role in the conspiracy.
8. Mr. Anil Kumar, learned A.S.G.I. appearing for the CBI
submits that the case of the appellant has been discussed in para-96 [page
Nos. 420 to 422] 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
Additional Judicial Commissioner-VII-cum-Special Judge, 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/-
