STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BENCH AT AURANGABAD Vs. PRABHAKAR KARBHARI GHATMALE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The proceedings are fled either against the decision of R.C.C. No. 92/1996 (original proceeding) or against the decision given in appeals which were fled to challenge the decision of conviction given in R.C.C. No. 92/1996 by the Trial Court. R.C.C. No. 92/06 was fled by the State in C.R. No. 123/1992 which was registered in Dhule Police Station for the ofence punishable under sections 409, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 471-A, 477-A, r/w. 34 of Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as 'I.P.C.' for short). The Trial Court convicted accused Nos. 1 to 3 of this case by the judgment and order dated 21.8.2001 for the ofences punishable under sections 420 r/w. 34 of Indian Penal Code. Each of the three accused was sentenced to sufer rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay fne of Rs.5,000/- and in default of payment of fne, they were to undergo, simple imprisonment for six months. These three accused were convicted for the ofence punishable under section 465 r/w. 34 of I.P.C. also and under that section, each of them was sentenced to sufer rigorous imprisonment for one year. They were acquuitted of the remaining ofences. When seven accused were tried, the remaining accused, except the aforesaid three, were acquuitted by the Trial Court of all the ofences. Accused Nos. 1 and 3 fled Criminal Appeal No. 17/2000 in Sessions Court, Dhule. By the decision dated 18.6.2008 the learned Sessions Judge allowed this appeal partly of accused No. 1. The decision of conviction given for the ofence punishable under section 420 of I.P.C. against accused No. 1 was set aside by the Sessions Court and accused No. 1 came to be convicted for the ofence punishable under section 417 of I.P.C. The frst appellate Court has convicted accused No. 1 for this ofence and he is sentenced to sufer rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay fne of Rs.5,000/-. The conviction given for the ofence punishable under section 465 r/w. 34 of I.P.C. against accused No. 1 is maintained by the learned Sessions Judge. Accused No. 3 is acquuitted of all the ofences by the frst appellate Court. Accused No. 2 had fled separate appeal No. 21/2001 to challenge the decision of conviction given against him by the Trial Court. That appeal is also partly allowed by the learned Sessions Judge by the common judgment dated 18.6.2008. The conviction given for the ofence punishable under section 420 r/w. 34 of I.P.C. to this accused is also set aside and he is convicted for the ofence punishable under section 417 r/w. 34 of I.P.C. Similar sentence is given to him which is given to accused No. 1. The conviction given to him for the ofence punishable under section 465 r/w. 34 of I.P.C. by the Trial Court is confrmed by the frst appellate Court. Due to this decision of Sessions Court, the State has fled Criminal Appeal No. 55/2009 and 56/2009 in this Court. As accused Nos. 1 and 2 are convicted by the Trial Court and frst appellate Court, they have fled Criminal Revision Nos. 145/2008 and 146/2008. As the Trial Court had acquuitted accused nos. 4 to 7 of all the ofences State has fled Criminal Appeal No. 430/2001 against that decision in this Court. The proceedings are fled as per the procedure which was in existence at the relevant time before the amendment of the Criminal Procedure Code (hereinafter referred to as 'Cr.P.C.' for short). All the sides are heard in all the proceedings.

(2.) In short, the facts leading to the institution of the aforesaid proceedings can be stated as follows :-

(3.) The Commissioner was immediate superior ofcer of General Manager of District Dairy. There was procedure to collect information about the requuirement of milk cans every year from all the districts functioning under the jurisdiction of Commissioner. The ofce of Commissioner used to publish tender notice for inviting tenders for supply of such cans. The Committee headed by the Commissioner used to place the order of supply with diferent contractors. Though the order of supply of cans used to be issued by the ofce of Commissioner, the payments were made in respect of supply of cans by concerned District Dairies as per the supply made to them.