KANAI LAL BOSE Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BOTH the cases, since arising out of the same case, were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.

(2.) CR . M. P. No. 1201 of 2010, filed on behalf of Kanai Lal Bose, Rajesh Gandhi and Ramesh Gandhi, is directed against the order dated 01/02/2001, passed by the Special Judge, CBI, Dhanbad in RC Case No. 20(A)/95 (D), whereby and whereunder cognizance of the offences punishable under Sections 120B, 420, 465, 468 and 471 of the Indian penal Code and also under Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, has been taken against them.

(3.) FURTHER it has been alleged that in the year 1992, M/s. BCCL had invited fresh tenders for transportation of coal to Alakdiha Coal Dump. That was challenged by one Ramesh Gandhi before the Kolkata High Court. The accused No. 7 and 8 fraudulently and dishonestly represented before the Management of M/s. BCCL, that the Kolkata High Court has restrained M/s. BCCL from interfering with the contract work awarded to M/s. CTCC, as a result of which, M/s. BCCL decided to drop the transportation work for Alakdiha Coal from NIT and thereby M/s. CTCC was allowed to continue with the work and thereby the accused persons (6, 7 and 8) were benefited. Further it has been alleged that M/s. BCCL sustained huge wrongful loss on account of payment being made to M/s. CTCC towards transit loss, supervision of loading of customer's truck and maintaining grade wise stock and loading of coal to the tune of Rs. 1,32,51,305.33. Thus, it has been alleged that accused persons committed offences punishable under Sections 120B, 420, 465, 466, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code and also under Section 13(2) read with Section 13(i)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and correspondingly Section 5(2) read with Section 5(i)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. On such allegation, FIR was registered as R.C. No. 20(A) of 1995(D). The matter was taken up for investigation. During investigation, it was found that M/s. CIL, Kolkata had issued NIT for transportation of coal/coke from colliery to the stockyard for unloading, screening, stacking size -wise and grade -wise at stockyard. The last date of submission of the tender was 1.7.1986 on which day at 3.00 P.M. technical bid was to be opened. On that day itself i.e. on 1.7.1986 a telephonic message was received by the Dy. C.M.E. (Sales) of BCCL, Dhanbad (accused No. 3) to the effect that date of sale of tender paper has been extended up to 18.7.1986 and last date of submission of tender has been extended up to 22.7.1986. Despite the extension of date, tenders, as per the order of the then C.M.D. B.R. Prasad, were opened on 1.7.1986 in utter disregard to the instruction issued by M/s. CIL, Kolkata. As per the instruction issued by M/s. CIL, tender documents received by C.I.L. and other subsidiaries all over India, pursuant to NIT issued by M/s. CIL were to be sent to M/s. CIL, Kolkata for further processing and scrutiny and thereby it was instructed by CIL to the officials of M/s. BCCL, vide its letter dated 26.6.1986 to bring the tender papers with him so that necessary processing and scrutiny be done before the next meeting of the tender committee. Instead of acting in accordance with the instruction, the then Dy. C.M.E. (Sales), M/s. BCCL (accused No. 3) sent a telex message on 1.7.1986 requesting Dy. G.M. (SY & T) and Chief of Marketing, M/s. CIL, Kolkata to give post facto approval to the opening of tender on 1.7.1986. This request was rejected by CIL, Kolkata, vide its letter dated 21.7.1986 and directed the then CMD, BCCL for cancelling the aforesaid tender and to re -tender the same. On receiving the said letter, the then CMD vide its letter dated 21.7.1986 wrote to the Chairman, M/s. CIL, Kolkata to allow him to proceed with tender and to award work by October, 1986.