B.B.MANGALMURTI, J - (1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the C.B.I.
(2.) It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that order dated 20th January, 2018 passed by Special Judge, C.B.I., Dhanbad is under challenge by which the application for discharge of the petitioner was dismissed. It is further submitted that as per allegation the petitioner while working as Income Tax Officer of Ward No.3(4), Bokaro Steel City, Bokaro, entered into a criminal conspiracy with co-accused persons including Barun Kumar Sinha, Senior Tax Assistant in the same ward of Bokaro during the period January, 2010 to April, 2010 in several cases where the cheque of refund amount from Income Tax were dishonestly validated in the different name of persons. These cheques were related to the period 2004-05 to 2007-08. It is also submitted that this petitioner was in no way associated with all these criminal conspiracy but has discharged his function in his official capacity. He also submitted that in reply to the letter of Joint Commissioner, Income Tax, Range-3, Bokaro dated 14th May, 2010, this petitioner had replied to the explanation sought from him and the same was submitted through letter dated 31st May, 2010 where it has been stated that adequate caution was taken by him and he always verified the amount in the new voucher with reference to the surrendered voucher. On the order sheet, the names of assessees were taken care of. It was the mistake committed by co-accused Barun Kumar Sinha, Senior Tax Assistant. He had reported against him for his fraudulent acts for necessary action. After submission of explanation of this petitioner, a departmental proceeding was initiated against erring Senior Tax Assistant by order dated 18th August, 2010 of the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-3, Bokaro. These materials were not considered by the court below while considering his discharge application.
(3.) Learned counsel for the C.B.I. submitted that this petitioner along with co-accused persons entered into a criminal conspiracy by making interpolation in the refund voucher. He further submitted that at the time of consideration of the discharge application, the court below is not required to examine voluminous material which may fall in the nature of mini trial. The court below is only to see whether material on record reasonably connects the accused with the crime. These proposition was held in the case of Asian Resurfacing of Road Agency Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation reported in 2018 (2) JLJR 320 (SC).;