CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION Vs. SANJAY SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is preferred seeking enhancement of sentence imposed by the XVII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru in its judgment and order of conviction dated 3.8.2006 passed in C.C No.20136/2005, wherein the respondent -accused was directed to undergo one day imprisonment for the offence punishable under Sections 417, 420, 465, 468 and 471 of IPC. The appellant has also challenged judgment and order dated 18.2.2009 passed in criminal appeal No.1621/2006 on the file of the XXI Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge and Special Judge for CBI cases, Bengaluru, wherein the first appellate court has confirmed the judgment and order of the trial court.

(2.) THE case of the prosecution in brief is that the respondent was running M/s Shobithia Milk Society, M/s Milton Supply Centre and M/s Somith Marketing Services. The Military Farm, Hebbal, Bangalore had invited quotations for the supply of cream 55% of B.F. for four months from April 1997 to July 1997. The respondent submitted four supply orders of Amul Butter for eight months from August 1997 to March 1998. The said bid was accepted by the Hebbal Military Farm and the proprietary concern of the respondent had supplied 4100 Kgs of fresh cream for a total consideration of Rs.2,05,700/ -. The respondent similarly quoted supply orders of Amul Butter from August 1997 to March 1998 and submitted a quotation to Military Farm, Hebbal and his bid was being the lowest rate, the said Farm accepted the bid and accordingly, it supplied 8309.400 Kgs of Amul Butter for a total amount of Rs.8,89,100/ -.

(3.) THE case was investigated by the CBI and then charge sheet was filed for the offences punishable under Sections 417, 420, 465, 468 and 471 of IPC before the trial court. After conclusion of the trial, the trial court convicted the accused holding that prosecution has proved its case beyond reasonable doubt in respect of the charges leveled against the respondent accused. The appellant -State being not satisfied with the sentence, approached the first appellate court in criminal appeal No.1621/2006. The first appellate court, by judgment and order dated 18.1.2009, has confirmed the order of the trial court. The judgment and order of conviction became final as the respondent has not at all challenged the same. But on the contrary, learned counsel for the respondent -accused made the submission that the accused has accepted and deposited the fine amount and he has also undergone a day's imprisonment. So the order of conviction recorded by the trial court has attained finality. The State has preferred the present appeal seeking enhancement of sentence imposed by the trial court.