SURESH PRASAD Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing for the Vigilance.

(2.) BEFORE adverting to the submissions advanced on behalf of the petitioner, the order dated 18.05.2012 needs to be recorded, which is as follows: -

(3.) MR . Jai Prakash, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that it is the case of the prosecution that then the Executive Engineer in his progress report reported that 2699 hand -pumps have been installed in the financial years 1990 -91, 1991 -92 and 1992 -93, but from other documents issued from the same office, it transpired that only 2171 hand -pumps had been stopped and, thereby, it has been alleged that 528 hand -pumps had never been installed, though the amount had been withdrawn.