YOGENDRA PRASHAD Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A First Information Report resulted in investigation, which in turn has resulted in filing of a charge sheet. The charge sheet so filed is the subject matter of challenge in the present application made under Section 482 of the Code.

(2.) AS it appears, the principal criminal element alleged is, alteration of Clause 5.03 (b) of the Agreement by the applicant. In course of hearing, it has been accepted that no change was effected to Clause 5.03 (b) of the Agreement. It is, however, the contention of the respondents that in the matter of implementation of the said Clause, the manner of implementation was altered. It has further been stated in the charge sheet that the necessity of certification of labour was done away with by the applicant and as a result, the accounts could not be coordinated. There is a further contention that the Deputy General Manager (Construction) paid Rs. 4 crores to the contractor on a bill of Rs. 9.26 crores on telephonic orders given by the applicant. Clause 5.03(b) authorized payment of labour bill to the extent of 20% of the work done on certificates. This was agreed to be paid on the basis of affidavits to be filed by the contractor. Prima facie, it appears that an affidavit itself, provided language of the affidavit is so couched, would tantamount to certification.