MANAGOBINDA MOHAPATRA Vs. STATE OF ODISHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is the oldest Single Judge Bench criminal appeal of this Court. It was presented on 22.04.1988, admitted on 27.04.1988 and the appellant was directed to be released on bail and realization of fine amount was stayed. After its admission, the case was listed before different Benches on different occasions for hearing but it was adjourned either on the prayer of the learned counsel for the appellant or learned counsel for the Vigilance Department. The matter was listed before me for hearing on 06.08.2020 and I took up the matter through Video Conferencing. The report of the Superintendent of Police, Vigilance Cell, Cuttack revealed that it was intimated to the appellant that the matter would be taken up on 06.08.2020. In spite of that, none appeared on behalf of the appellant. Since the appeal was pending before this Court for more than thirty years, in presence of the learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Vigilance Department, Mr. Deba Prasad Das, Advocate who is having extensive practice on criminal law for more than thirty five years, both in the trial Court as well as before this Court was appointed as Amicus Curiae to conduct the case for the appellant and the Registry was directed to supply the paper book to Mr. Das by 07.08.2020 and to intimate him that the matter would be taken up for hearing in the week commencing from 10.08.2020. Accordingly, Registry supplied the paper book to Mr. Das. On 13.08.2020 when the matter was again listed for hearing and it was taken up through video conferencing, Mr. Das, learned Amicus Curiae was ready for hearing but the learned counsel for the appellant who had filed the criminal appeal in the year 1988 appeared and sought for two weeks adjournment which was refused and accordingly, the hearing was taken up and concluded on that date itself and the judgment was reserved. Mr. Das, learned Amicus Curiae took time till 17.08.2020 to file his written note of submission and accordingly he also filed the same.

(2.) The appellant Managobinda Mohapatra along with coaccused Laxmidhar Pani and Satyanarayan Chand faced trial in the Court of learned Special Judge, Bhubaneswar in T.R. Case No. 01 of 1982 for offences punishable under sections 409, 467, 471, 477-A read with section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code and section 5(1)(c) read with section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 (hereafter '1947 Act').

(3.) The prosecution case, as per the first information report lodged by Shri Bipin Bihari Mohapatra (P.W.18), Inspector Vigilance, Intelligence Cell, Cuttack on 21.05.1980 before the Superintendent of Police, Vigilance, Central Division, Cuttack is that in course of Vigilance enquiry, it revealed that the coaccused Lakshmidhar Pani, O.A.S., Ex-Tahasildar, Jaleswar was functioning as Executive Officer, Jaleswar N.A.C. from 14.12.1967 to 10.11.1972 whereas the appellant was the Clerk dealing with accounts and co-accused Satyanarayan Chand was the Sub-Assistant Engineer of Jaleswar N.A.C. during the period 1969-71. By virtue of letter No.4732 dated 07.03.1969 of the Tribal and Rural Welfare Department, Government of Odisha, a sum of Rs.6,000/- (rupees six thousand) was sanctioned to Jaleswar N.A.C. for construction of five houses for Scheduled Caste people engaged in un-cleaned occupation of the N.A.C. The said amount of Rs.6,000/- was drawn by the co-accused Laxmidhar Pani from Balasore Treasury vide T.V. No.117 dated 20.03.1969 and credited to P.L. accounts of the N.A.C. on the same day. From the records, it appeared that an utilization certificate showing expenditure of Rs.6,000/- in providing housing facilities to the sweepers was furnished by the coaccused Laxmidhar Pani on 10.04.1972 although no houses had been actually constructed for the sweepers and no land had been acquired by the N.A.C. nor any land was alienated by the Revenue Department for the said purpose and even no site selection was made. The construction of the houses was shown to have been done in case of five sweepers of the N.A.C. namely Kartika Mukhi (P.W.11), Jatindra Ghadai (P.W.12), Puniti Mahal, Tuni Mirdha and Narendra Mukhi which was found to be not true and payment of Rs.1,200/- to each of the sweepers was also shown. The appellant reflected the expenditure in the Cash records on 31.05.1971 and the co-accused Satyanarayan Chand, Sub-Assistant Engineer also recorded false measurements regarding the construction work. The co-accused Laxmidhar Pani had falsely recorded check measurement.