Aparesh Kumar Singh, J. - (1.) Heard learned Senior Counsel for the Appellant and learned A.S.G.I representing the C.B.I. on the prayer for suspension of sentence made by the Appellant through I.A. No. 528 of 2018.
(2.) The Appellant has been convicted in R.C. Case No. 64(A)/1996 Pat by the learned Court of Additional Judicial Commissioner-I cum Special JudgeVII, CBI(AHD Scam) for the offences under Section 120B read with Section 420,467,468,471,477(A) of the I.P.C and sentenced to undergo imprisonment of 3 year and a fine of Rs.5 Lakhs and in default thereof to undergo imprisonment for 1/2 (half) year separately. He has further been convicted for the offence under Section 13(2) read with Section 13(i)(c)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and sentenced to undergo imprisonment of 3 year and a fine of Rs.5 Lakhs and in default thereof to undergo imprisonment for 1/2 (half) year separately.
(3.) Learned Senior Counsel for the Appellant has made the following submission in support of the prayer:- There are no evidence on record to substantiate the charge of conspiracy under which the Appellant has been convicted for these offences. He has referred to the case set up by the prosecution as is taken note of in para 20, 21, 22,23 and 24 of the impugned judgment. The discussion made therein in are in respect of the material collected during investigation while filing charge sheet but no material evidence has come on record to substantiate the involvement of the Appellant in the conspiracy of committing these crimes as Chief Minister of the State during that period. As a matter of fact on a memorandum submitted on 14.01.1993 by the Union of Nongazetted employees of the Animal Husbandry Department and on a complaint bearing letter no. 52 of 1992 dated 02.06.1994 relating to alleged fraudulent withdrawal of Rs.50 Lakhs, it was the petitioner in the capacity of Chief Minister, who had directed two Officers Sri Bachchu Prasad and Sri S.B.Choudhary to conduct inquiry at Deoghar. Both the Officers rushed to Deoghar on 19.06.1994 and conducted inquiry on 20.06.1994. However the report of the inquiry was not submitted to the office of the Chief Minister. The Statement of P.W.160, Dr. Shiv Balak Choubey has supported the aforesaid contention. Further the allegation made by the prosecution that the Appellant stopped the vigilance inquiry is also incorrect. Statement of P.W.146, then then Director General, Vigilannce Mr. D.N.Sahay has been relied upon in support of the aforesaid statement.;