M.KARPAGA VINAYAGAM, J. - (1.) CR . Appeal No. 307/01 arises out of an order dated 3.5.2001 passed by the Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi, whereby the ad interim order of attachment dated 30.8.1996 was made absolute under the provisions laid down under Sec. 5(3) of the Criminal Law (Amendment) Ordinance, 1944. Cr. Appeal No. 310/2001 arises out of the consequential order appointing Receiver on 12.6.2001.
(2.) THE short facts leading to filing of this appeal are as follows: Pursuant to the orders of the High Court and the Supreme Court, C.B.I took up investigation in Fodder Scam cases and registered cases against several accused. Allegation in brief is that the accused persons, in pursuance of a conspiracy, defrauded Government of Bihar, now Jharkhand, to the extent of several crores during the period 1/990 to 1994 on the basis of fake allotment letters purported to have been issued by the Director, A.H. Department, for purchase of medicines. Fake supplies were shown by the suppliers and money was withdrawn on the basis of fake allotment orders and the same was misappropriated by the accused persons, suppliers, public servants and others. Dr. S.B. Sinha, who was a public servant, was involved in all 41 cases as he was the brain behind the conspiracy, as a result of which Government of Bihar was defrauded to the tune of Rs. 600 Crores. Investigation conducted revealed that accused, Dr. S.B. Sinha, acquired huge moveable and immoveable properties in his name and also, in the names of his wife, children and others at different places while functioning as Regional Joint Director, South Chotanagpur Range, Ranchi and that the holders of the properties acquired by him are the appellants who are closely related to the said Dr. S.B. Sinha. The appellants do not have any source of income to acquire those properties, but they are simply name -lenders. Apprehending the disposal of those properties hurriedly; respondent -C.B.I filed an application on 29.8.1996 before the District Judge for the attachment of the properties lying in the jurisdiction. On 30.8.1996 ad interim order of attachment was passed and thereafter the order was extended from time to time. On 21.2.1997, the opposite party -appellants filed their show cause. On 25.10.199 Dr. S.B. Sinha died. However, proceedings continued as against other persons in whose names the properties were purchased. Ultimately, on 3.5.2001 final order was passed making the ad interim order of attachment absolute. Thereafter consequential order was passed by appointment of the Receiver to manage those properties by the order dated 12.6.2001. Both these orders are under challenge in Cr. Appeal Nos. 307 & 310 Of 2001 respectively. The only point urged by the counsel for the appellants is that when the main allegation is against Dr. S.B. Sinha who died on 25.10.1999, the impugned orders dated 3.5.2001 and 12.6.2001 cannot be passed against a dead person and the appellants, his relatives, who are not accused. Further it was contended that though the conjoint reading of Sections 3, 4 and 5 of the Ordinance would provide that before making the ad interim order of attachment absolute, the parties should be given opportunity to load evidence to substantiate that the properties of appellants are not liable for attachment, the same has not been given to them.
(3.) ON this point, we have heard the counsel for the parties.;