D.K. Sinha, J. - (1.) THE petitioner herein has preferred this petition under Section 482, CrPC for quashing the charge framed against him on 27.6.2003 in R.C. Case No. 66(A)/96 by Shri P.R. Das, Special Judge -IV, CBI, AHD Cases, Ranchi under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 read with 465, IPC.
(2.) THE First Information Report was lodged by the CBI on 5.7.1996 with respect to the famous 'Fodder Scam' wherein, the father of the petitioner Dr. Gauri Shankar Prasad was made named accused (Annexure -1) in relation to excess withdrawal and expenditure in the Animal Husbandry Department during the period 1977 to 1996. Learned Counsel submitted that the name of the petitioner was conspicuously absent in the First Information Report and there was no whisper about his complicity in the alleged 'Fodder Scam'. However, after investigation the CBI submitted charge -sheet on 26.1.2000 and his name was figured at Sl. No. 48 therein with the allegation at page 28 that he had actively assisted the firm 'Medivet'. The petitioner was neither a partner nor in any manner connected with the conduct of business of the Firm Medivet. The petitioner had neither signed the cheque nor even a voucher or made any purchase on behalf of the said Firm and therefore, it is beyond apprehension as to how without any evidence or material suggesting participation in the business of Medivet, the charge -sheet was filed against him alleging his active assistance. The petitioner at the relevant point of time was in Bangalore, nothing to do with the Firm and his accusation is devoid of any material simplicitor.
(3.) ADVANCING his argument learned Counsel submitted that the trial Court below framed the charges against the petitioner in a mechanical manner without even taking into account of the material on the record except on the presumption about the active involvement of the petitioner in the Firm Medivet. As a matter of fact, the CBI had implicated Firm Medivet and its partners as accused in so far as the allegations of fake supplies giving rise to "Fodder Scam". Similarly, CBI failed to bring any material of nexus between the petitioner and Medivet rather he has been implicated summarily on mere assumption and presumption though the partners of the said firm have already been charge -sheeted.;