Aparesh Kumar Singh, J. - (1.) Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned A.S.G.I representing C.B.I on the prayer for suspension of sentence made through I.A. No. 4475 of 2018.
(2.) The appellant stands convicted in connection with R.C. Case No. 45(A)/1996-Pat vide impugned judgment dated 09th day of April,2018 passed by the learned Court of Special Judge-VII, C.B.I.(A.H.D. Scam Cases), Ranchi for the offences under Sections 120-B r/w Section 409, 420, 467, 468,471477(A) of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 13 (2) r/w Section 13(1)(c)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. He has been sentenced to undergo R.I. for 31/2 Years (Three and Half years) and a fine of Rs. 50,00,000/-(Fifty Lakhs), in default of payment of fine, to further undergo S.I for Nine Months (09 months) separately under the aforesaid Sections of the I.P.C. Further he has been sentenced to undergo R.I. for 3/ Years (Three and Half years) and a fine of Rs. 50,00,000/-(Fifty Lakhs), in default of payment of fine to further undergo S.I for Nine Months (09 months) separately for the offences under the P.C. Act. Both the sentences were ordered to run consecutively and not concurrently.
(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant was Travelling Veterinary Officer (T.V.O) at the District Animal Husbandry Office at Godda for the period 1991-92 to 1995-96. Statement of the appellant under section 313 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 and his role have been discussed at para 136 and 137 of the impugned judgment. Appellant accepted having certified the submitted vouchers of firm after receiving the supply of material but denied having issued false certificate. He further stated that certification of animal feed, medicine, machinery was made in the light of allotted money and denied receiving false voucher without supply of materials, which caused wrongful loss of Rs. 34,91,54,844/- to the Bihar Government revenue. Learned Trial Court, however has, on the basis of prosecution witnesses statements i.e., P.W.1, 2, 12, 108, 111, 195 and 197 and certain documentary evidences concluded that only a sum of Rs. 5,71,000/- was allotted to the Animal Husbandry Department during the said period but the accused in an illegal way assessed and passed heavy amount without allotted valid budget. Learned Trial Court also found that supplier firms were not in existence for transportation purpose. Thus, the accused who was holding a responsible post misused his position to facilitate fraudulent payments to the private firms in criminal conspiracy with the other co accused.;