Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + HC Indian Laws - 2018 (12) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (12) TMI 1248 - BOMBAY HIGH COURTOffence under Prevention of Corruption Act - Absence of a valid sanction - trial as conducted against the public servant - security scam - Harshad S. Mehta case against whom the case however stands abated on account of his untimely death in the year 2001. The other Accused were at the relevant time the Officers in the State Bank of India,Held that:- Here in the case, Investigating Officer has obtained the sanction for prosecution of accused No.1 R. Sitaraman. However, the Prosecution has failed to prove it and therefore, it is as good as not on record. The Prosecution has filed a report dated 30/08/2018 stating that the sanctioning authority Mr. Gordhan Bhojraj Kathuria has expired on 25/01/2018 and therefore, not available for giving evidence. In considered opinion of this Court, if the sanctioning authority was not available, then in that case, the Prosecution could have examined any other witness from the said Department, who was acquainted with the facts of the case or even with the signature of the sanctioning authority and get the sanction proved. The burden was entirely upon the Prosecution to prove the fact that the requisite sanction has been obtained. The Prosecution has however not made any attempt to prove the sanction by examining the subordinate officer or the staff, who has seen the sanctioning authority signing the sanction order or who is acquainted with the signature of the sanctioning authority. Merely, filing the order purported to be the sanction order alleged to have been signed by the competent authority, does not discharge the burden on the Prosecution of proving the sanction, according to law - no hesitation in holding that the Prosecution has failed to prove its case against all the Accused beyond reasonable doubt. Hence, the order. (i) Accused No.1 R. Sitaraman, Accused No.3 Ravi Kumar, Accused No.4 Ashok Agarwal, Accused No.5 Janardan Bandopadhyay, Accused No.8 Ashwin Mehta, Accused No.15 S.R. Gupta, Accused No. 16 B.D. Raut and Accused No. 17 P. Murlidhar stand acquitted for the offences punishable under Section 120B and 420, in the alternate Section 409 read with Section 120B of IPC. (ii) Accused No.1 R. Sitaraman, Accused No.3 Ravi Kumar, Accused No.4 Ashok Agarwal, Accused No.5 Janardan Bandopadhyay, Accused No.12 Suresh Babu, Accused No.15 S.R. Gupta, Accused No. 16 B.D. Raut and Accused No.17 P. Murlidhar, are further acquitted for the offences punishable under Section 13(1)(c) and (d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and Accused No.8 Ashwin Mehta stands acquitted for the offence punishable under Section 13(1)(c) and (d), read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, read with Section 109 of IPC. (iii) Accused No.1 R. Sitaraman and Accused No. 16 B.D. Raut are further acquitted for the offence punishable under Section 477A read with Section 120B of IPC. (iv) Accused No.3 Ravi Kumar and Accused No. 12 Suresh Babu are acquitted for the offence punishable under Section 467 and 471 read with Section 120B of IPC. (v) Accused No.8 Ashwin Mehta and Accused No. 15 S.R. Gupta stand acquitted for the offence under Section 411 and 414 read with Section 120B of IPC. (vi) Bail Bonds of all the Accused persons stand cancelled. However, as per Section 437A of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, they are directed to execute fresh P.R. Bonds and Surety Bonds for the amount of ₹ 25,000/-each for their appearance before the Hon’ble Supreme Court, as and when notice is issued to them in respect of any Appeal or Petition filed against Judgment and such Bonds shall be in force for six months. Accused No.1 R. Sitaraman, Accused No.3 C. Ravi Kumar, Accused No.4 Ashok Agarwal, Accused No.5 Janardan Bandopadhyay, Accused No.8 Ashwin Mehta and Accused No.12 Suresh Babu are granted three weeks time to furnish cash surety of ₹ 25,000/- each. Accused No.15 S.R. Gupta, Accused No. 16 B.D. Raut and Accused No. 17 P. Murlidharan were released on bail on furnishing PR Bonds and Cash security of ₹ 25,000/- each. Same security be continued for the period of six months for their appearance before the Hon’ble Supreme Court, as and when the notice is issued to them in respect of any Appeal or Petition filed against Judgment and such Bonds shall be in force for six months.
|