NATIONAL FERTILIZERS LTD. Vs. CBI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Vide the present appeal, the appellant/ complainant seeks direction thereby to set aside the impugned order on sentence dated 12.07.2018 passed by learned Special Judge (PC Act) (CBI)-04, Central District, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi in CC No. 532219 of 2016 to the extent of awarding inadequate compensation to the petitioner.

(2.) In the present case, while convicting the respondents, learned trial Court has imposed fine of Rs. 212,06,00,000/- upon the respondents. However, 80% of the total fine i.e. Rs. 169,70,40,000/- has been imposed on respondent Nos.2 to 9 and 20% of the said fine i.e. Rs. 42,42,60,000/- imposed upon respondent No.1 under Section 357(1) Cr.P.C.

(3.) Case of the appellant is that Ministry of chemicals and Fertilizers vide Government Order dated 25.10.1994, appointed the appellant as a canalizing agent and authorized it to import urea and pursuant to the aforesaid government order, tenders were floated by the appellant. The appellant entered into an agreement on 09.11.1995 with a Turkish Company namely, M/s. Karsan Daanismanlik Turizm Sanayi Ticaret Limited STI (herein after referred to as "M/s Karsan") for supply of 2,00,000 Metric Ton of Urea 46 Fertilizer at price of US $190 PMT (hereinafter referred to as "said agreement"). Mr. Tuncay Alankaus and Mr. Cihan Karanci who are also convicted vide judgment dated 09.07.2018 by the Ld. Special Judge and sentenced to undergo punishment vide impugned order, are the beneficial owners of M/s. Karsan. However, subsequently, the appellant came to know that the respondent No. 2 to 9 herein and Late Sh. A.E. Pinto arrayed as accused No. 9 in the judgment dated 09.07.2018 and the impugned order dated 12.07.2018, were in collusion and they conspired with each other and some unknown persons to siphon off the exchequer's money to the tune of Rs.133 Crores approx. ($38 Millions) under the guise of said agreement dated 09.11.1995. and, therefore, a complaint dated 19.05.1996 was made by then ED (Vig.), NFL. Consequently, CBI registered the case being RC 3(A)/ 96- ACU-I under Section 120B/ 409/ 420/ 201 IPC and under Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1) (c) and (d) PC Act.