GYANCHAND PRASAD AGRAWAL Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the C.B.I.

(2.) The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with the case registered under Sections 120-B read with Sections 420/468/471 of the Indian Penal Code and Sec. 13(2) read with Sec. 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

(3.) The prosecution case is that the petitioner's firm M/s Dolomite Mining Corporation in connivance with unknown officials of Bokaro Steel Plant and Public Analyst M/s Superintendence Company India (Pvt.) Ltd. Katni has dishonestly and fraudulently supplied the sub-standard quality of dolomite with silica content in the range of 1.5%, whereas the test report of the supplied dolomite conducted by the Research and Control Laboratory, actual; Silica content has been found to be far off the specification of the purchase order i.e. 1.5%. It further appears that during investigation it was found that after placement of the purchase order on 31/08/2008, petitioner's firm M/s Dolomite Mining Corporation had supplied 1,29,980 metrique tonne Dolomite against 1,69,000.00 MT from 18.05.2008 to 29.04.2009 whereas M/s Bokaro Steel Plant has received only 1,27,560.67 MT. for which Goods receipt Note were issued under the signature of co-accused, i.e. officials of BSL and they have also issued the advice note to the Finance Department of the BSL for making payment to M/s Dolomite Mining Corporation. It also appears that the test of purchaser's sample at BSL R & C Laboratory shows that the Silica content was between 0.52 to 1.68%; whereas in the report of public analyst the Silica content has been shown 1.4%, thus the Silica content in the report of public analyst has been manipulated to be near the range of 1.5% as per the specification of purchase order.