T.T. YUSUF Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CALLING in question the legal acceptability of the order dated 27.4.2015 passed by the learned Special Judge in connection with Special Case No. 05/11, the accused/petitioner filed this application under Section 401 read with Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of the charge sheet filed against him.

(2.) SIEVING out unnecessary details, the prosecution case in a nutshell is such that a reliable information has been received by SPE/CBI/Port Blair on 28.7.2011 that one Gurupada Mondal (Executive Engineer) of North Andaman Construction Division, APWD, Mayabunder by misusing his official position as public servant entered into a criminal conspiracy with C.M. Roy (Government Contractor), Goalghar and other public servants. In pursuance of the said conspiracy, said Gurupada Mondal awarded the contract of construction of 20 numbers of Type -III quarters at Sub -division -1, Mayabunder to Shri C.M. Roy wherein the said contractor quoted Rs. 2,40,72,212/ - for the said work. This was the lowest among the other tenderers. Curiously enough, at the time of awarding the work order, said Gurupada Mondal and C.M. Roy in connivance with other officials of NACD altered the amount mentioned in the certain items of the tender submitted by Shri C.M. Roy and in that process they have attempted to commit forgery and enhanced the tender value by an amount of Rs. 32,68,168/ - over and above the actually quoted amount of Rs. 2,40,72,212/ -. Shri Gurupada Mondal (Executive Engineer), NACD invited sealed item -wise rated tender from the eligible contractors. On the relevant day Shri Gurupada Mondal was not in station and so it was opened by the Assistant Engineer -in -Charge of Gurupada Mondal at the prescribed time and date mentioned in the tender. The said Assistant Engineer declared C.M. Roy as the lowest bidder and has also announced the value quoted by him as Rs. 2,40,72,212/ - in the presence of other contractors. At the time of opening the tender there was no correction, deletion or overwriting. Subsequently the said tender value was raised to the tune of Rs. 2,73,40,380/ -. In order to ensure that C.M. Roy quoted to be lowest bidder despite the alteration, the accused/petitioner directly altered the total amount by enhancing the amount to the extent of Rs. 32,68,168/ -.

(3.) AT the time of hearing Mr. Tulsi Lall, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the accused -petitioner raised his voice stating inter alia that for want of evidence, the I.O. himself did not submit charge sheet against C.M. Roy (Contractor). Another accused Gurupada Mandal (Executive Engineer) has been discharged by this Hon'ble Court. CBI preferred SLP(Criminal) 5309 of 2012 but that was turned down by the Hon'ble Apex Court. He wonders how the present accused will face the trial under Section 120B IPC, when there is no other accused.