Delhi District Court
Cbi vs . Sushil Kumar Sharma Etc (Ntpc ... on 3 August, 2021
CBI Vs. Sushil Kumar Sharma Etc (NTPC Employees CGHS Ltd)
IN THE COURT OF SH. VIRENDER BHAT
SPECIAL JUDGE, PC ACT, CBI-15,
ROUSE AVENUE DISTRICT COURT, NEW DELHI.
IN THE MATTER OF:
CBI No. : 187/2019
CNR No. : DLCT11-000792-2019
FIR No. : RC.BD1/2006/E/0007
PS : CBI/BS&FC/New Delhi
U/s : 120-B IPC r/w Section 420, 467, 468, 471
IPC and 13(1)(d), 13(2) r/w section 13(1)(d)
of P.C. Act, 1988
STATE
THROUGH
CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
NEW DELHI
VERSUS
1. Sushil Kumar Sharma
S/o Sh. Madan Lal Sharma
R/o Village Lalsa, Post Dansa,
Tehsil Rampur Bushar, District Shimla,
Himachal Pradesh. ............Accused No. 1
2. Anna Wankhede
S/o Sh. Parnuji
R/o 148-E, A-2, Mayur Vihar Phase 3,
Delhi-110096. .............Accused No. 2
3. Sri Chand
S/o Late Sh. Hari Singh
R/o 274A, Pocket - C, Mayur Vihar,
Phase -II, Delhi-110091 ...............Accused No. 3
CBI Case No. 187/2019 1 of 37
CBI Vs. Sushil Kumar Sharma Etc (NTPC Employees CGHS Ltd)
4. Gopal Singh Bisht
S/o Sh. Inder Singh Bisht
R/o Quarter No. 225, Sector 12,
R.K. Puram, Delhi
Also at: 269, DDA Janta Flat,
Vasant Apartment, New Delhi. ............Accused No. 4
5. Ved Pal Singh (Already discharged vide order dt.
09.07.2012)
S/o Late Hukum Singh
R/o Flat No. 551, Sunehari Bagh CGHS Ltd,
Sector 13, Rohini, Delhi-110085. .............Accused No. 5
6. Prahalad Kumar Thirwani
S/o Late Moti Ram Thirwani
R/o 348-E, Pocket 2, Mayur Vihar Phase I,
Delhi-110091. ...............Accused No. 6
Date of Institution : 29.01.2008
Date of judgement reserved on : 29.07.2021
Date of pronouncement of judgement : 03.08.2021
J U D G E M E N T :-
1. Certain acts of cheating, corruption and forgeries committed with regards to the records of the housing society namely NTPC Employees CGHS Ltd (hereinafter referred to as "the Society") have been brought under scanner in this case.
2. The Central Bureau of Investigation (In short 'CBI') had registered Preliminary Enquiry (PE) in this case in persuance to the order dt. 13.06.2006 passed by the Hon'ble Delhi High Cout in Civil Writ Petition No. 10066/2004 which was lateron converted into FIR bearing No. RC.BD1/2006E/007 dated CBI Case No. 187/2019 2 of 37 CBI Vs. Sushil Kumar Sharma Etc (NTPC Employees CGHS Ltd) 22.09.2006 under section 120B r/w 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC and section 13 (2) r/w 13 (1) (d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
3. The Society NTPC Employees CGHS Ltd was formed in the year 1983 with 258 Promoter Members. It was duly registered with the office of the Registrar Co-operative Societies (In Short 'RCS Office'), New Delhi on 26.12.1983 vide registration No. 1163 (GH). In the first Managing Committee formed at the time of its inception, Sh. Kamlesh Gandhi was the Secretary and Sh. Om Prakash Khowal was the President. In the elections held on 05.07.1990, 14 members were elected to the Manging Committee with Sh. O.P. Khowal as its President and Sh. Ravinder Singh as its Secretary which was duly intimated to the RCS office. Thereafter, the Secretary Sh. Ravinder Singh sent a letter dt. 02.11.1992 to the RCS office for approval of 45 resignations/fresh enrolments which were not approved by the RCS Office and the Society was directed to produce the records. However, the society did not produce the records inspite of the repeated letters from RCS office and accordingly a Show Cause Notice dt. 08.01.1993 was served upon it. The society did not respond to the show cause notice and subsequent correspondences from RCS office. It remained dormant since 1992.
Prosecution Case:-
4. The case of the prosecution is that during the period 2002- 2005 Sh. H.C. Gupta (since deceased), Sushil Kumar Sharma (A-
CBI Case No. 187/2019 3 of 37 CBI Vs. Sushil Kumar Sharma Etc (NTPC Employees CGHS Ltd)
1), Anna Wankhede (A-2), Sri Chand (A-3), Gopal Singh Bisht (A-4) the then LDC/Dealing Assistant in RCS Office, Ved Pal Singh (A-5) the then Assistant Registrar in RCS Office and P.K. Thirwani (A-6) the then Sr. Auditor in RCS Office entered into a Criminal Conspiracy with the object to cheat DDA by securing allotment of land to the society on the strength of forged documents related to the society. In pursuance to the conspiracy, the accused public servants namely Gopal Singh Bisht, Ved Pal Singh and P.K. Thirwani abused their official position by resort to corrupt & illegal means in fraudulently processing the file of NTPC Employees CGHS Ltd on the basis of forged documents to ensure that land is allotted to the society by the DDA.
5. It is alleged that on the directions of the accused Sri Chand, entire records of the society related to its Managing Committee Meetings dt. 25.07.1984, 20.01.1985, 15.06.1989, 05.09.1990 and 15.10.1990, false resignations of all the 247 promoter members, fresh enrolments, minutes of GBM dt. 21.10.1983, special GBM dt. 05.07.1990 & 25.08.2002, affidavits of fictitious members, cash receipts etc were forged by accused Sushil Kumar Sharma and Anna Wankhede. False resignations and fresh enrolments were shown to have accepted ante dated. All these forged records were submitted in RCS office by S.K. Sharma for approval of the list of 115 members of the society.
6. Accused Gopal Singh Bisht, the Dealing Assistant is stated to have suo moto initiated note dt. 25.09.2002 in reference to CBI Case No. 187/2019 4 of 37 CBI Vs. Sushil Kumar Sharma Etc (NTPC Employees CGHS Ltd) previous letter dt. 05.09.2001 sent to the society proposing to send a reminder to the society. The note was approved by Sh. Yogi Raj, the then Assistant Registrar and the reminder was sent to the society in response to which the accused S.K. Sharma, himself as Secretary of the society, submitted letter dt. 28.09.2002 informing about change of registered office of the society to 183, Andrews Ganj, New Delhi and seeking some time to prepare the documents. The request was accepted by accused Gopal Singh Bisht and Ved Pal Singh.
7. Further allegation is that on the request from S.K. Sharma accused P.K. Thirwani was deputed to conduct pending audit of the society for the period 1988-89 to 2001-02 (i.e. for 14 years) who submitted a false audit report to assist the other accused in achieving the object of the conspiracy. Thereafter, the accused S.K. Sharma submitted all the forged documents in RCS office on 29.10.1992. In furtherance to the criminal conspiracy, these forged documents were accepted by accused Gopal Singh Bisht and Ved Pal Singh. They also represented falsely that original record of the society has been verified and found in order, despite there being large number of inaccuracies in the same.
8. It is further case of prosecution that without there being any order from the competent authority, accused Gopal Singh Bisht carried out the inspection of the society on 30.10.2002 and dishonestly submitted a false inspection report which was readily accepted by accused Ved Pal Singh. Despite their being various discrepancies in the records of the society, accused Ved Pal Singh CBI Case No. 187/2019 5 of 37 CBI Vs. Sushil Kumar Sharma Etc (NTPC Employees CGHS Ltd) put up the case for approval of final list of 115 members of the society and for transmission of the same to DDA for allotment of land. Accordingly, the list was then forwarded to DDA on 08.11.2002 for allotment of land to the society.
9. It is alleged that H.C. Gupta (M.C. Gupta) was following the cause of this society and funds to be deposited with DDA were also collected by him from the members of the society. False resignations of promoter members and of those fictitious members wose names were mentioned in the approved list of members, were illegally accepted by the managing committee comprising of Sandeep Garg (President), Pooja Garg (Vice President), Sudhir Bansal (Secretary), Leonard Toppo (Treasurer) and Rashi Garg (Executive Member) at the instance of H.C. Gupta (M.C. Gupta).
10. It is also alleged that the allotment cum offer letter dt. 03.02.2003 was received personally by accused S.K. Sharma on the same day from DDA office under the authority letter purportedly issued by Managing Committee but he was not the Secretary of the society on that date. Possession of the plot of land is stated to have been received by Leonard Toppo on 28.06.2004 on the basis of authority letter issued by Sudhir Bansal.
11. On the basis of the above facts & circumstance which had surfaced during the course of investigation, the chargesheet was submitted in the concerned court.
CBI Case No. 187/2019 6 of 37 CBI Vs. Sushil Kumar Sharma Etc (NTPC Employees CGHS Ltd)
12. Sanction for prosecution of accused public servants Gopal Singh Bisht was filed alongwith the chargesheet whereas sanction for prosecution qua P.K. Thirwani was filed lateron. No such sanction was obtained qua the third accused public servant Ved Pal Singh as he had retired from service before filing of the chargesheet.
Charges against the accused:-
13. Vide order on charge dt. 09.07.2012, accused Ved Pal Singh (A-5) was discharged. Charges were framed against the remaining accused as under:-
(i) u/s 120B r/w section 420/468/467 IPC and section 13 (2) r/w 13 (1) (d) of P.C. Act against all the accused;
(ii) u/s 420 IPC, u/s 468 IPC and u/s 471 IPC r/w 468 IPC against accused Sushil Kumar Sharma (A-1);
(iii) u/s 420 IPC and u/s 468 IPC against accused Anna Wankhede (A-2) and Sri Chand (A-3); and
(iv) u/s 13 (1) (d) P.C. Act against accused Gopal Singh Bisht (A-4) and P.K. Thirwani(A-6).
14. All of these accused pleaded not guilty and hence, trial was held.
Proseuction Evidence:-
15. As many as 129 witnesses have been examined by the prosecution to prove the charges against the accused, who can be conveniently categorized as under:-
(I) Those who were employees of NTPC and had become CBI Case No. 187/2019 7 of 37 CBI Vs. Sushil Kumar Sharma Etc (NTPC Employees CGHS Ltd) members of the society in 1983 but were falsely shown to have resigned lateron:-
PW-1 Sh. B.K. Srivastava
PW-2 Sh. O.P. Khorwal
PW-5 Sh. Bal Kishan Soni
PW-57 Sh. Dinesh Kumar
PW-58 Sh. Alok Kumar Lahiri
PW-59 Sh. Ajit Kumar
PW-60 Sh. Shailendra Sharma
PW-61 Sh. P. Sengupta
PW-62 Sh. K.B. Gaur
PW-63 Sh. Dushyant Kumar Tyagi
PW-64 Sh. Ram Lal Satija
PW-65 Sh. Himangshu Kundu
PW-66 Sh. Vijay Kachru
PW-67 Sh. Rajesh Kumar Baderia
PW-68 Sh. Shyamal Ray
PW-69 Sh. Raj Deo Keshri
PW-70 Sh. Atul Shrivastav
PW-71 Sh. Surinder Singh Isser
PW-72 Sh. Dinesh Kumar
PW-73 Sh. Subhash Chandra
PW-74 Sh. Ashim Saha
PW-75 Sh. Kamlesh Gulati
PW-76 Sh. Abhijit Kumar Sen
PW-77 Sh. Rajendra Lal Das
PW-78 Sh. Sudhir Kumar Bansal
PW-79 Sh. Qaseem Ahmad Farhat
CBI Case No. 187/2019 8 of 37
CBI Vs. Sushil Kumar Sharma Etc (NTPC Employees CGHS Ltd) PW-80 Sh. Sheesh Ram PW-81 Sh. Kewal Krishna Seth PW-82 Sh. Rajive Kumar Batra PW-83 Sh. Mehar Chand Talwar PW-84 Sh. Raj Singh Mandar PW-85 Sh. Sushil Kumar Jha PW-86 Sh. Shri Prasad PW-87 Smt Kamla Baveja PW-88 Sh. Vallabh Krishan Madan PW-89 Sh. S.Y. Narayanan PW-90 Sh. Gautam Badyopadhyay PW-91 Sh. Dinesh Chandra Dhoundiyal PW-92 Sh. Ravinder Kumar Gupta PW-93 Sh. Ramesh Pardasani PW-94 Sh. Dhan Prakash Mittal PW-96 Sh. Ramesh Kumar Chaudhary PW-99 Sh. Pramod Kumar PW-111 Sh. Babu Lal PW-112 Sh. Ravinder Singh PW-115 Sh. Nirmal Mishra PW-116 Sh. Devender Gupta PW-120 Sh. K.D. Nirmal (Note:- PW2 also was NTPC Employee and had taken membership in 1983. He resigned in 1991 but has been falsely shown to have resigned in 2003 vide resignation letter dt.
14.01.2003 Ex. PW-2/A. He has denied his signatures on it.)
(ii) Those who were not the employees of NTPC and CBI Case No. 187/2019 9 of 37 CBI Vs. Sushil Kumar Sharma Etc (NTPC Employees CGHS Ltd) have been inducted as members of the society from the year 2002 onwards:-
PW-36 Sh. Chetan Swaroop Bansal
PW-37 Sh. Sudhir Bansal
PW-38 Sh. Praveen Medard Beatrix Toppo
PW-40 Sh. Subhash Goel
PW-41 Sh. Dinesh Chand Goel
PW-42 Sh. Rakesh Gupta
PW-43 Smt. Chameli Gupta
PW-44 Sh. Mukesh Goel
PW-45 Smt. Rashi Garg
PW-46 Sh. Nitin Garg
PW-47 Sh. Neeraj Garg
PW-48 Smt. Rachna Garg
PW-49 Smt. Pooja Garg
PW-50 Sh. Sandeep Garg
PW-55 Sh. Magan Lal Aggarwal
PW-56 Sh. Gagan Garg
PW-118 Sh. Lalit Kumar Goel
PW-119 Sh. Manoj Bansal
PW-121 Sh. Gaurav Garg
(iii) Those who had not taken the membership of the society but have been falsely shown as members:-
PW-39 Sh. Deepak Khattar
PW-95 Sh. Satish Kumar Sharma
PW-97 Sh. Mohan Lal
PW-100 Sh. Narender Kumar Garg
CBI Case No. 187/2019 10 of 37
CBI Vs. Sushil Kumar Sharma Etc (NTPC Employees CGHS Ltd) PW-102 Sh. Abhay Singh PW-114 Sh. Patras PW-117 Sh. Diwakar Mohod
(iv) Other Private Witnesses :-
PW-51 Sh. Yashwant Kumar
PW-54 Sh. Sunil Kumar Gupta
PW-101 Sh. Rajesh Kumar Gupta
(v) Postmen :-
PW-3 Sh. Sita Ram
PW-4 Sh. Bansi Lal
PW-6 Sh. Paras Nath
PW-7 Sh. Raghubir Singh
PW-8 Sh. Ram Ji Lal
PW-9 Sh. Vijender Singh
PW-10 Sh. Suresh Kumar
PW-11 Sh. Kiran Pal
PW-12 Sh. Mublesh Kumar
PW-13 Sh. Bharat Singh
PW-14 Sh. Ratan Lal
PW-15 Sh. Balbir Singh
PW-16 Sh. Jai Nath
PW-17 Sh. Krishna Kumar
PW-18 Sh. Dharam Pal
PW-19 Sh. Jai Pal
PW-20 Sh. Hem Raj Sharma
PW-21 Sh. Nawab Khan
CBI Case No. 187/2019 11 of 37
CBI Vs. Sushil Kumar Sharma Etc (NTPC Employees CGHS Ltd) PW-22 Sh. Rajender Kumar PW-23 Sh. Sant Ram PW-24 Sh. Davender Singh PW-25 Sh. Davender Kumar PW-26 Sh. Chander Singh PW-27 Sh. Raju Kumar PW-28 Sh. Naresh Kumar PW-29 Sh. Subhash Chander PW-30 Sh. Rajesh Kumar PW-31 Sh. Kishore Kumar PW-32 Sh. Prakash Chand PW-33 Sh. Jagminder Singh PW-34 Smt. Anita PW-35 Sh. Bikram Singh PW-123 Sh. Dharambir Singh
(vi) Notary Public :-
PW-53 Sh. Chander Bhan Arya
(vii) Stamp Vendor :-
PW-107 Sh. Awanish Kumar
(viii) Witness from Bank :-
PW-52 Sh. Shyam Sunder Bhandari
(ix) Witnesses from DDA :-
PW-104 Sh. Virender Singh Verma
PW-105 Sh. Mehar Chand Singal
CBI Case No. 187/2019 12 of 37
CBI Vs. Sushil Kumar Sharma Etc (NTPC Employees CGHS Ltd) PW-106 Sh. Ramesh Kumar Gupta
(x) Witnesses from RCS Office :-
PW-103 Sh. Sunil Razdan
PW-108 Smt. Aruna Chaudhary
PW-113 Sh. V.C. Jain
PW-122 Sh. Rakesh Bhatnagar
PW-124 Sh. P.M.Tanwar
(xi) Expert Witness :-
PW-98 Sh. P. Venugopala Rao
(xii) Witnesses for taking of specimens of the accused:-
PW-127 Sh. Ranbir Singh Rayat
PW-128 Sh. Tek Chand
PW-129 Sh. Anit Chaudhary
(xiii) Sanctioning Authorities:-
PW-109 Sh. R.K. Srivastava
PW-110 Sh. Rakesh Mehta
(xiv) Witnesses from CBI:-
PW125 Sh. Hardeep Singh
PW-126 Sh. Braj Raj Singh
Statement u/s 313 Cr PC of the accused:-
16. Upon conclusion of the prosecution evidence, all the accused were examined u/s 313 Cr PC. They denied the CBI Case No. 187/2019 13 of 37 CBI Vs. Sushil Kumar Sharma Etc (NTPC Employees CGHS Ltd) incriminating evidence put to them and claimed innocence.
Final Arguments:-
17. Ld. PP as well as the Defence Counsels have been heard at length on several dates. With their assistance, the entire oral and documentary evidence on record has been perused.
Court's Discussion :-
18. According to the prosecution case as set up in the chargesheet, the accused had hatched a criminal conspiracy with the object to cheat RCS office as well as DDA by preparing a fictitious membership list of the dormant society NTPC Employees CGHS Ltd on the basis of forged documents and to get the same approved in RCS Office for onward transmission to DDA for allotment of land to the society. It is alleged that in pursuance to the said conspiracy, entire record of the society including its membership register, proceedings registers, membership application forms, affidavits of members, resignations/refund vouchers in the names of promoter members etc were forged in order to achieve the object of the conspiracy.
19. PWs 1, 5, 57-94, 96, 99, 111, 112, 115, 116 and 120 were the promoter members of the society having become its members in the year 1983 when it was formed. They have been falsely shown to have resigned from the membership of the society whereas, as per their deposition, they never resigned from society membership. They have denied their signatures on the resignation letters/refund vouchers in their respective names.
CBI Case No. 187/2019 14 of 37 CBI Vs. Sushil Kumar Sharma Etc (NTPC Employees CGHS Ltd) PW67 has deposed that there was no meeting of the society after 1992 and hence all the minutes recorded in the register Ex. PW- 1/H are not genuine. PW1 has denied his signature on the minutes of General Body Meeting Mark PW-1/D as well as the another such meeting dt. 21.10.1983 Ex. PW-1/J saying that he did not attend any such meetings. PW2 has deposed that he resigned in the year 1991 when a flat was alloted to him by DDA but has been falsely shown to have resigned in the year 2003 vide resignation letter Ex. PW-2/B. He denied his signatures on this resignation letter. He further deposed that the signatures in his name appearing on the minutes of General Body Meeting dt. 21.10.1983 (Ex. PW-1/J), 15.02.1984 (Ex. PW-2/E1) and 25.07.1984 (Ex. PW-2/E2) as well as on the minutes of subsequent General Body Meetings are not his signatures. He also denied his signatures on the audit reports Ex. PW-2/L and Ex. PW-2/M.
20. PW68 too has deposed that minutes of first General Body Meeting dt. 21.10.1983 in Ex. PW-1/J are not genuine as it bears his forged signatures as well as that of other members. He deposed that affidavit Ex. PW68/D in his name also is forged as it does not bear his genuine signatures. Similarly, PW72 to PW94, PW96, PW111 and PW112 have deposed that the proceedings of first General Body Meeting dt. 21.10.1983 Ex. PW-1/J are false and their signatures have been forged against their names in the membership register Ex. PW-1/F and at various places in the proceedings register Ex. PW-1/J. CBI Case No. 187/2019 15 of 37 CBI Vs. Sushil Kumar Sharma Etc (NTPC Employees CGHS Ltd)
21. PW39, PW95, PW97, PW100, PW102, PW114 and PW117 have deposed that they had not taken membership of the society at any point of time but have been fictitiously shown as members of the society. They have denied their signatures on the membership applications, affidavits and other related documents in the respective names. Further, PW37, PW38, PW39, PW41, PW42, PW43, PW44, PW46, PW46, PW47, PW48, PW49 and PW50 have deposed that they did not attend any meeting of the society. All of them except PW37 deposed that their signatures have been forged on the minutes of various meetings recorded in the proceedings register Ex. PW-36/V. PW37 deposed that the said register was brought to him by H.C. Gupta and he simply put his signatures as Secretary on the same. PW38 has further deposed that no meeting of the society was held on 25.09.2002 or any subsequent date at 8-B, Masjid Moth, DDA Flats, Phase I, New Delhi which is his parental house.
22. The final freeze list of the society Ex. PW-2/T, which was forwarded to DDA for allotment of land to it, mentions the names of PW38 alongwith his two brothers (at Serial No. 91, 92 & 93), PW40 (Sr. No. 113), PW41 (Sr. No. 111), PW42 (Sr. No. 105), PW43 (Sr. No. 115), PW44 (Sr. No. 110), PW45 (Sr. No. 114), PW46 (Sr. No. 103), PW47 (Sr. No. 106), PW48 (Sr. No. 108), PW49 (Sr. No. 97), PW50 (Sr. No. 109), PW118 (Sr. No. 112), PW119 (Sr. No. 99) and PW121 (Sr. No. 95) despite the fact that they had already resigned from the society membership about which they have themselves stated in their depositions before this court. They expressed surprise as to why their names had been CBI Case No. 187/2019 16 of 37 CBI Vs. Sushil Kumar Sharma Etc (NTPC Employees CGHS Ltd) included in the said list on the basis of which land has been alloted to the society.
23. It is also evident that the said list contains the names of several fictitious or imaginary persons. During the course of investigation notices were sent to all the members mentioned in the said list Ex.PW-2/T by the Investigation Officer by speed post but most of those notices could not be delivered either for the reason that the addressee never resided at the given address or that the given address did not exist. This is manifest from the deposition of Postmen PW3, PW4, PW6-PW35 and PW123 to whom these speed post envelopes had been entrusted for delivery. They have proved their respective endorsements in this regard on these envelopes. The envelopes are Ex. PW-3/A, Ex. PW-4/A, Ex. PW-4/B, Ex. PW-6/A, Ex. PW-7/A, Ex. PW-8/A, Ex. PW-9/A, Ex. PW-10/A, Ex. PW-10/B, Ex. PW-11/A, Ex. PW-11/B, Ex. PW-12/A, Ex. PW-13/A, 14/A, Ex. PW-15/A, Ex. PW-15/B, Ex. PW-16/A, 17/A, Ex. PW-18/A, Ex. PW-18/B, Ex. PW-18/C, Ex. PW-19/A, Ex. PW-20/A, Ex. PW-21/A, Ex. PW- 22/A, Ex. PW-23/A, Ex. PW-24/A, Ex. PW-25/A, Ex. PW-26/A, Ex. PW-27/A, Ex. PW-28/A, Ex. PW-29/A, Ex. PW-30/A, Ex. PW-31/A, Ex. PW-32/A, Ex. PW-33/A, Ex. PW-34/A, Ex. PW- 35/A AND Ex. PW-123/A. The testimony of these postmen has remained unrebutted as they have not been cross-examined on behalf of any of the accused.
24. The evidence on record, therefore, proves beyond any doubt the case of the prosecution that almost the entire records of CBI Case No. 187/2019 17 of 37 CBI Vs. Sushil Kumar Sharma Etc (NTPC Employees CGHS Ltd) the society NTPC Employees CGHS Ltd were forged during the period 2002-2004 and false membership list of the society Ex. PW-2/T was prepared which was submitted in the RCS office and on the basis of which land was alloted to the society.
25. The crucial question which now arises for consideration is whether the forgery in the records of the society was done in pursuance to any conspiracy as alleged by the prosecution and if so who were the conspirators and who is the actual imposter?
26. Sections 120 A and 120 B of the Indian Penal Code make conspiracy a substantive offence and renders the mere agreement to commit an offence punishable. The elements of a criminal conspiracy have been stated to be :-
(a) an object to be accomplished,
(b) a plan or a scheme embodying means to
accomplish that object,
(c) an agreement or understanding between
two or more of the accused persons whereby, they become definitely committed to cooperate for the accomplishment of the object by the means embodied in the agreement or by any effectual means, and
(d) in the jurisdiction where the statute required an overt act.
27. The offence of criminal conspiracy has its foundation in an agreement to commit an offence. A conspiracy consists not CBI Case No. 187/2019 18 of 37 CBI Vs. Sushil Kumar Sharma Etc (NTPC Employees CGHS Ltd) merely in the intention of two or more, but in the agreement of the two or more to do an unlawful act by unlawful means. The essential ingredients of this offence are that there should be an agreement between the persons who are alleged to conspire and the said agreement should be for doing an illegal act or for doing by illegal means an act which itself may not be illegal. Therefore, the essence of criminal conspiracy is an agreement to do an illegal act and such an agreement can be proved by direct evident or by circumstantial evidence or by both.
28. Like most crimes, conspiracy also requires an act (actus reus) and an accompanying mental state (mens rea). The agreement constitutes the acts, and the intention to achieve the unlawful object of that agreement constitutes the required mental state. To convict a person for the offence of conspiracy, the prosecution must show that he agreed with others that together they would accomplish the unlawful object of the conspiracy. A major problem arises in connection with the requirement of an agreement in determining the scope of a conspiracy - who are the parties and what are their objectives. This determination is critical, since it defines the potential liability of each accused.
29. Where the factum of conspiracy is sought to be inferred from the circumstances, the prosecution has to show that the circumstances give arise to a conclusive and irresistible inference of an agreement between two or more persons to commit an offence. As in all other criminal offences, the prosecution has to discharge its onus of proving the case against the accused beyond CBI Case No. 187/2019 19 of 37 CBI Vs. Sushil Kumar Sharma Etc (NTPC Employees CGHS Ltd) reasonable doubt. The circumstances in a case, when taken together on their face value, should indicate the meeting of minds between the conspirator for the intended object of committing an illegal act or an act which is not illegal, by illegal means. A few bits here and a few bits there on which the prosecution relies cannot be held to be adequate for connecting the accused with the commission of crime of criminal conspiracy. It has to be shown that all means adopted and illegal acts done were in furtherance of the object of conspiracy hatched.
[See State Vs. Nalini (1999) 5 SCC 253, Yakub Razak Menon Vs. State of Maharashtra (2013) 13 SCC 1, Isher Singh Vs. State of A.P. (2004) 11 SCC 585, State (NCT of Delhi) Vs. Navjot Sandhu (2005) 11 SCC 600, State of Karnataka Vs. J. Jayalalitha (2017) 6 SCC 263, Firozuddin Basheeruddin Vs. State of Kerala (2001) 7 SCC 596].
30. In the instant case, the proceeding registers of the society Ex. PW-1/H & Ex. PW-36/V its membership register Ex. PW-1/F alongwith other records like membership application forms of members, their affidavits, resignation letters/refund vouchers of primary members etc were forged and ultimately a false membership list Ex. PW-2/T was prepared. These original registers and other record were handed over by Magan Lal Aggarwal, President of the Society, to DSP K.M. Virki (initial enquiry officer) vide recovery memos Ex. PW125/B and Ex. PW- 125/C. This is evident from the deposition of PW125 who has identified the signatures of Mr. Virki at Point 'A' on both these memos. As per the testimony of the Investigating Officer CBI Case No. 187/2019 20 of 37 CBI Vs. Sushil Kumar Sharma Etc (NTPC Employees CGHS Ltd) (PW126), he had received all these records from PW125. He had also seized the election record of the society from its President Magan Lal Aggarwal vide seizure memo dt. 05.01.2007 Ex. PW- 126/D.
31. According to deposition of PW97, he knew accused Sri Chand as both were the members of Naval Technical Offiers CGHS Ltd. He has deposed that in 1997, he was elected President of that society and Sri Chand was elected Vice President. He used to visit the office of that society at 304, Pocket C, Mayur Vihar, Phase II, Delhi on Saturdays and Sundays. He further deposed that accused Sushil Kumar and Anna Wankhede were working in that office and were doing field work for Sri Chand. He identified all of them in court. He also deposed that Page Nos. 52 to 63 & 92 in the proceedings register of NTPC Employees CGHS Ltd ex. PW-1/H have been written by him on the asking of Sri Chand. He identified signatures of accused Sushil Kumar in the said register as well as in other three registers at several points (D-1 Vol. I, D-2 Vol. II & D-3 Vol. III).
32. In cross-examination, he admitted that accused Sri Chand, Anna Wankhede and Sushil Kumar did not write or sign any document in his presence. He stated that he had identified the signature of accused Sushil Kumar on various documents during his chief examination only for the reason that word "Sushil" was written on those documents. However, he denied the suggestion that he had not written the page nos. 52 to 63 and page 92 in register Ex. PW-1/H on the asking of Sri Chand or that Sri Chand CBI Case No. 187/2019 21 of 37 CBI Vs. Sushil Kumar Sharma Etc (NTPC Employees CGHS Ltd) had not sent instructions to him or that he did not write these pages on the instructions of Sri Chand.
33. It is necessary to note here that name of PW97 finds mention at Serial No. 304 at Page No. 25 in the membership register of NTPC Employees CGHS Ltd Ex. PW-1/F (Colly.). However, he has deposed that he had never taken the membership of this society. According to him, his signatures have been forged against his name in the said register, affidavit Ex. PW-97/C, resignation letter Ex. PW-97/D and the letter Ex. PW-97/E.
34. From the testimony of PW97, it is manifest that accused Sri Chand was involved in the forgery of the records of the society. The witness too had prepared false minutes of General Body Meetings of the society from 10.02.1991 to 03.12.1994 (Pages 52 to 63) and meeting dt. 27.02.2002 (Page 92), as recorded in the register Ex. PW-1/H, on the instructions of accused Sri Chand. Even his name has been included fictitiously in the membership list of the society, probably by none other than accused Sri Chand. Nothing has been pointed out by Ld. Counsel for accused Sri Chand to show that PW97 was having any animosity with accused Sri Chand or otherwise had any reason to depose falsely against him. Even the accused Sri Chand has not stated anywhere in his examination u/s 313 Cr. PC that PW97 had any enemity with him for which reason he has deposed falsely. To the contrary, he admitted that PW97 used to work under him in the office of Naval Technical CGHS Ltd.
CBI Case No. 187/2019 22 of 37 CBI Vs. Sushil Kumar Sharma Etc (NTPC Employees CGHS Ltd) Accused Sri Chand and PW97 had no concern with the society at all particularly in the years 1991 to 1994. Therefore, these minutes appear to have been fabricated in the year 2004, at the instance of accused Sri Chand.
35. Even though it is denied by Sri Chand that accused Anna Wankhede and Sushil Kumar were working under him, yet PW97 has very specifically stated that these two accused were working in the office of Sri Chand at 304A, Pocket C, Mayur Vihar Phase II, Delhi and were doing field work for him. On this aspect, the deposition of PW114 also needs to be referred to. He is the son of accused Sri Chand himself. He too has very clearly deposed that accused Anna Wankhede used to visit the office of Sri Chand on Saturdays and Sundays and do work on the instructions of Sri Chand. He has further deposed that accused Sushil Kumar was doing field job for Sri Chand. He identified both these accused during his deposition before this court. Thus, he corroborates the version of PW97 in this regard. The evidence on record, therefore, proves the fact that accused Anna Wankhede and Sushil Kumar used to visit the office of Sri Chand and do work under his instructions.
36. PW107 was working as Sub Vendor under the Stamp Vendor P.R. Bhatia in 2001-2002. As per his testimony, he had sold the 115 stamp papers Ex. PW-51/C (Colly.) except the one which is Ex. PW-46/D, to accused Anna Wankhede. He has deposed that he had affixed the stamps on the back side of these stamp papers and these bear the serial number also in his CBI Case No. 187/2019 23 of 37 CBI Vs. Sushil Kumar Sharma Etc (NTPC Employees CGHS Ltd) handwriting. He further deposed that he did not get time to fill up the particulars of the purchasers on the back of these stamp papers. Anna Wankhede gave him a list of purchasers and he noted their names in his register. Anna had assured him that he will fill up the details himself on the stamp papers. He stated that the entries in this regard in the register Ex. PW-107/B from Serial No. 109026 on Page Nos. 209 to Sr. No. 109125 on Page No. 211 are in his handwriting. He also identified accused Anna Wankhede.
37. Though some doubt was sought to be raised with regards to the veracity of the testimony of PW107 yet, in the re- examination conducted by Ld. PP, he has very firmly reiterated that his statement in examination in chief is true and correct. Further, it is to be noted that Anna Wankhede was not a stranger to him. He had deposed in the chief examination itself that he knew Anna Wankhede who used to come to them alongwith a typist namely Ravi Robinson to purchase stamp papers. Therefore, it is manifest that Anna Wankhede was a regular visitor to stamp vendor PW107 and the day on which PW107 sold him 115 stamp papers Ex. PW-51/C (Colly.) was not the day when he (PW107) saw him (Anna Wankhede) for the first & last time.
38. The testimony of another witness PW51 also is material. His father was running a Typing Institute till his (father's) death in the year 2009 and he used to work there as a Typing Instructor. He has deposed that the resignation letters cum receipts Ex. PW-
CBI Case No. 187/2019 24 of 37 CBI Vs. Sushil Kumar Sharma Etc (NTPC Employees CGHS Ltd) 51/A (Colly.), membership applications Ex. PW-51/B (Colly.) and affidavits Ex. PW-51/C (Colly.) were brought to their Institute by accused Anna Wankhede for typing on the blank spaces. He had typed on the blank spaces upon these documents. He further deposed that the payment for the typing work was made by accused Anna Wankhede. He has also stated that he knew Anna Wankhede as he used to come to his father for getting typing work done. There is nothing contrary or adverse in his cross-examination.
39. It is, thus, evident from the evidence on record that accused Anna Wankhede was actively involved in the forgery of the records of the Society NTPC Employees CGHS Ltd, though at the instance of accused Sri Chand under whom he was working. He got the resignation letter cum receipts, membership applications and affidavits in names of several members of the society typed from the typing institute of PW51. He had also purchased the stamp papers from PW107 on which the affidavits of members were fictitiously prepared. It will be apposite to note here that most of those persons in whose names were these affidavits Ex. PW-51/C (Colly.), membership application Ex. PW-51/B(Colly.) and resignation letters cum receipts Ex. PW- 51/A (Colly.) prepared, have denied their signatures on these in their depositions before this court. It is also manifest that accused Anna Wankhede was the actual imposter as he had prepared false minutes of various General Body Meetings of the Society in the register Ex. PW-1/H, though on the instructions of accused Sri Chand.
CBI Case No. 187/2019 25 of 37 CBI Vs. Sushil Kumar Sharma Etc (NTPC Employees CGHS Ltd)
40. Further, as per the expert opinion Ex. PW-98/B rendered by PW98 in this case, the minutes dt. 21.10.1983, 15.02.1984, 05.04.1985, 05.05.1985, 08.06.1986, 20.06.1989, 05.07.1990, 28.11.2002 and 02.12.2002 in the register Ex. PW-1/H are in the handwriting of accused Anna Wankhede. According to his opinion, the accused Anna Wankhede has forged the signatures of Rashi Garg and Sudhir Bansal on the minutes recorded in the register Ex. PW-36/V and has also written the names in the 'Nominees' column against the names of members from serial nos. 42 to 93 and 98 to 262 in the membership register Ex.PW- 1/F. The opinion further shows that the signatures of the members as well as their nominees from Serial Nos. 263 to 271 and 280 to 296 in the said register Ex. PW-1/F are in the handwriting of accused Anna Wankhede.
41. Pws 72 to 94 and PW96, who were the promoter members of the society, have deposed that minutes of meeting dt. 21.10.1983 as well as the subsequent meetings recorded in the register Ex. PW-1/H are not genuine and their signatures have been forged on these minutes.
42. In view of the testimony of all the above noted witnessses coupled with the expert opinion ex. PW98/B, it is manifest that accused Anna Wankhede was totally involved in the forgery of the records of the society and he himself too was the imposter.
43. As regards accused Sushil Kumar Sharma, it is the case of prosecution that he appeared in the RCS Office on 29.10.2002 on CBI Case No. 187/2019 26 of 37 CBI Vs. Sushil Kumar Sharma Etc (NTPC Employees CGHS Ltd) behalf of the society as its Secretary and submitted forged documents. It is alleged that he appeared again on 30.10.2002 alongwith purported original documents of the society for verification. He is also stated to have submitted an affidavit on 18.10.2002 giving therein the particulars of 245 false resignations and 77 fresh enrolments, which were fictitious.
44. Evidence on record discussed hereinabove manifests that accused Sushil Kumar Sharma alongwith accused Anna Wankhede was working in the office of accused Sri Chand and doing field work for him. The approved list of members of society Ex. PW-2/T shows his name at Serial No. 56 with membership No. 303.
45. Perusal of the noting file Ex. PW-97/F shows that one S.K. Sharma, Hony. Secretary of the Society, had appeard on 18.10.2002, 29.10.2002 and 30.10.2002. His presence is specifically marked in the notes dt. 18.10.2002 and 30.10.2002. That person has signed at three pointes i.e. Q-1512, Q-1513 and Q-1514 on the margin of the notes on these three dates as token of his presence in the office. The signatures at theses three places clearly appear and can be read as "Sushil".
46. PW106, who was posted as LDC in DDA (Group Housing Branch), has deposed that he had handed over the Land Allotment Letter Ex. PW-104/A to S.K. Sharma who had produced the authority letter from the society Ex. PW-106/A and photocopy of ID Card Ex. PW-106/B. This photocopy of the ID CBI Case No. 187/2019 27 of 37 CBI Vs. Sushil Kumar Sharma Etc (NTPC Employees CGHS Ltd) card is the copy of driving license bearing the name and other particulars of accused Sushil Kumar. When this witness was asked to identify S.K. Sharma from amongst the persons present in court, he pointed to accused Sushil Kumar saying that perhaps he is the person S.K. Sharma who received the above letter. Nothing contrary has come out in his cross-examination on the aspect of identity of accused Sushil Kumar Sharma as S.K. Sharma who had received the above letter. Only a couple of suggestions were put to him which he denied.
47. From the proved facts and circumstances noted hereinabove, it can safely be infered that it was none other than accused Sushil Kumar Sharma, who had appeared in the RCS Office as Secretary of the Society on 18.10.2002, 29.10.2002 & 30.10.2002, had produced the forged records of the society in the office and had received the Allotment Letter Ex. PW-104/A from PW106.
48. Thus, it is manifest that these three accused Sri Chand, Anna Wankhede and Sushil Kumar Sharma were working in tandem with each other with only one object in mind i.e. the preparation of a fictitious list of 115 members of the society on the basis of forged records and to get the same approved in RCS office. Their conduct clearly shows that they were acting in pursuance to a well hatched conspiracy and were performing their role as agreed between them. Hence, it is proved from the evidence on record that the records of the society had been forged and then submitted in RCS office in pursuance to a CBI Case No. 187/2019 28 of 37 CBI Vs. Sushil Kumar Sharma Etc (NTPC Employees CGHS Ltd) conspiracy hatched initially by and between accused Sri Chand, Anna Wankhede and Sushil Kumar Sharma, the object of which was to cheat RCS office as well as DDA and to secure allotment of land to the society from DDA. Their criminal acts remained under the carpet in the RCS office as they had involved certain officials of the office also in the conspiracy and ultimately they succeeded in achieving the object of the conspiracy.
Role of Accused Public Servants:-
49. As already noted hereinabove, accused Gopal Singh Bisht was the Dealing Assistant and accused Ved Pal Singh (since discharged vide order dt. 09.07.2012) was the Assistant Registrar posted in the RCS Office during the relevant period i.e. the years 2001-2002. Accused P.K. Thirwani was posted as Auditor who is stated to have conducted the audit of the society.
50. Ex. PW-97/F is the noting file related to the society maintained in the RCS Office. Its perusal reveals that after the note dated 18.06.1994 at Page 22/N, there is straightaway note dated 05.09.2001 at Page 23/N. Notes dated 11.02.1993 and 18.06.1994 indicate that the society had not responded to the letters from the office for allotment of land to it and approval of its freeze list of members.
51. Note dt. 05.09.2001 records that while going through the files it was revealed that the audit of the society and its election has not been conducted since long. Its list of members as well as the resignations/enrolments have not been approved.
CBI Case No. 187/2019 29 of 37 CBI Vs. Sushil Kumar Sharma Etc (NTPC Employees CGHS Ltd) Accordingly, it was proposed to send a letter to the society to seek information in this regard. The author of this note has remained unknown. No witness could identify the person who has prepared it. However, PW122 has identified the signature at Point X1 below the note to be that of Sh. Ramesh Chandra, the then Assistant Registrar who has approved it. Though the fact that the file was taken up suddenly vide the said note after a gap of more than seven years in the absence of any request in this regard from the society raises suspicion about its bonafide and genuineness yet since neither the person who prepared it nor Sh. Ramesh Chandra who approved it have been arraigned as accused in this case, nothing further needs to be said on this aspect.
52. As per the testimony of PW103, the subsequent notes dated 24.09.2002, 11.10.2002, 18.10.2002, 29.10.2002 and 30.10.2002 are in the handwriting of accused Gopal Singh Bisht and bear his signatures at Points X1, X, X, X & X respectively. The note dt. 24.09.2002 has been written more than a year after the information had been sought from the society in pursuance to note dt. 05.09.2001. Perusal of the note dt. 24.09.2002 reveals that no response had been received from the society and hence, it was proposed to issue a reminder. The note has been approved by the then Assistant Registrar Yogi Raj. PW122 has identified the signature of Yogi Raj at Point X-2, below this note.
53. The note dt. 11.10.2002 records that in response to the letters dt. 06.09.2001 and 25.09.2002 sent by the office, a letter CBI Case No. 187/2019 30 of 37 CBI Vs. Sushil Kumar Sharma Etc (NTPC Employees CGHS Ltd) dt. 11.10.2002 has been received from S.K. Sharma, Hony. Secretary of the society, informing the change of office address of the society from Lodhi Industrial Area, New Delhi to 183, Andrews Ganj, New Delhi and seeking some more time to complete its records. It was proposed to ask the society to furnish all the records within one month. The note has been duly approved by the then Assistant Registrar Ved Pal Singh. PW103 has identified his signatures at Point Z below the note.
54. The note dt. 18.10.2002 records the presence of S.K. Sharma, Hony. Secretary of the society who submitted affidavits regarding verification of the final list. It also bears signature of Ved Pal Singh (A/R) at Point Z-1 below it.
55. Perusal of the note dt. 29.10.2002 reveals that the documents pertaining to final list of 115 members of the society had been submitted alongwith letter dt. 29.10.2002 of S.K. Sharma, Hony. Secretary of the Society and hence, it was proposed to ask the society to furnish the original records for verification. The note is duly approved by the then Assistant Registrar Sh. Ved Pal Singh. PW103 had identified the signature of Ved Pal Singh at Point Y below the note.
56. The subsequent note dt. 30.10.2002 also records the presence of S.K.Sharma, Hony. Secretary of the society who had appeared alongwith original records in connection with final list of 115 members of the society for verification. The same were counter checked/verified and found in order. Accordingly, it was CBI Case No. 187/2019 31 of 37 CBI Vs. Sushil Kumar Sharma Etc (NTPC Employees CGHS Ltd) proposed to put up the case for approval of final list of 115 members of the society. This note also is approved by the Assistant Registrar Ved Pal Singh vide his signature at Point Z which have been identified by PW103.
57. Then there is detailed typed note dt. 31.10.2002prepared by accused Gopal Singh Bisht mentioning therein the brief background of the case, the details of resignation accepted/fresh enrolments made from time to time, the names of 115 final members of the society etc. and in the end proposing the approval of the list to be forwarded to DDA for allotment of land to the society subject to the condition that if any resignations/enrolments are found false, the society will be held responsible. This note too has been approved by Sh. Ved Pal Singh, the then Assistant Registrar vide his endorsement and signature at Point Y. He marked the file to the Joint Registrar.
58. The then Joint Registrar Rakesh Bhatnagar has appeared as PW122 in this case. He has deposed that note dt. 01.11.2002 is in his handwriting whereby he marked the file to RCS for approval. He further deposed that the RCS appended his signature at Point Z below the note and sent back the file to him. He, then, marked the file to Assistant Registrar vide his endorsement and initials at Point X-3. He has futher deposed that the A/R Ved Pal Singh put his signatures at Point X-4 and marked the file to dealing assistant.
59. It is in this manner that the final list of 115 members of the CBI Case No. 187/2019 32 of 37 CBI Vs. Sushil Kumar Sharma Etc (NTPC Employees CGHS Ltd) society was approved and lateron forwarded to DDA for allotment of land to it.
60. No doubt accused Gopal Singh Bisht has prepared the notes dt. 24.09.2002, 18.10.2002, 29.10.2002, 30.10.2002 and 31.10.2002 thereby initiating the movement of file related to the society, but it does not appear that he did so malafidely, dishonestly or with any criminal intent. The file had been already taken up vide note dt. 05.09.2001 after a long liatus/hiatus of more than 7 years. He was only doing the follow up action as required. Moreover, he was only a dealing assistant i.e. a lowest rung employee in the office. He had no decision making authority. His job was to study the file and proposed next course of action as per his ability and understanding of the things and that is exactly what he has done. His notes have been duly approved by his immediate officer i.e. the Assistant Registrar Ved Pal Singh, who had authority to take decisions. It appears very ironical and unfortunate that the officer (i.e. Ved Pal Singh Assistant Registrar) who had the power to approve or disapprove the actions suggested by accused Gopal Singh Bisht (Dealing Assistant) and take any course of action as required, has been discharged vide order dt. 09.07.2012 and petty clerk type employee has been made to suffer the trial of this case when all his suggested actions had been duly approved by the senior officer.
61. It was for the Assistant Registrar Ved Pal Singh to apply his mind to the notes prepared by accused Gopal Singh Bisht CBI Case No. 187/2019 33 of 37 CBI Vs. Sushil Kumar Sharma Etc (NTPC Employees CGHS Ltd) (Dealing Assistant) and take appropriate action as required. He was not bound by the actions suggested by dealing assistant. It was for him to order inspection of the society office or random survey of the members of the society to ascertain the genuineness or otherwise of the claims of the society even if no such action was suggested by the dealing assistant but he did not do so. It is a clear case of dereliction of duty on his part. He does not appear to have acted in honest, bonafide and proper discharge of responsibilities as a public servant. However, since he has already been discharged in this case, any further discussion qua his conduct too would be futile.
62. Be that as it may, the fact remains that no evil motive or criminal intent can be attributed to the dealing assistant Gopal Singh Bisht. It was argued by the Ld. PP that admittedly records of the society were produced before him on 30.10.2002 and had he checked the records carefully, he would have detected forgery. The submission is that since he was involved in the conspiracy, he did not conduct actual verification of the records and noted falsely that the records are in order. No force is found in these submissions. What he had done is to compare the photocopies already submitted with the originals produced on that day and found those in order. It was not his job to verify each and every resignation/fresh enrolment. For this very reason he has stated at the end of the note dated 31.10.2002 that if any resignation/enrolment is found fake, the society will be responsible. IT was not possible for him to find merely on verification of the original record as to whether any resignation/ CBI Case No. 187/2019 34 of 37 CBI Vs. Sushil Kumar Sharma Etc (NTPC Employees CGHS Ltd) fresh enrolment was fictitious or genuine.
63 It has been wrongly alleged in the chargesheet that the accused Gopal Singh Bisht carried out the inspection of the society on 30.10.2002 fraudulently in the absence of any order from the competent authority and submitted a false inspection report. In fact, as is evident from the perusal of the note dated 30.10.2002, he had not conducted inspection of the society at all. He had only counter checked/verified the records of the society on that day. Since, neither the Assistant Registrar nor any other senior officer has objected to his such act, it can't be said that he acted without any authority from the senior officers in the office.
64. Hence, accused Gopal Singh Bisht can't be held liable as a Conspirator. He deserves to be acquitted.
65. As regards the accused P.K. Thirwani, it is alleged that he was deputed to conduct pending audit of the society for the period 1988-89 to 2001-02 i.e. for 14 years but he submitted a false audit report without visiting the registered office of the society in contravention of the DCS Rules.
66. I have perused the audit report Ex. PW-108/B submitted by accused P.K. Thirwani. He has stated in this report that:
(i) society has not complied with the objections raised in previous audit report;
(ii) society has not submitted compliance report as per proforma 16;
CBI Case No. 187/2019 35 of 37 CBI Vs. Sushil Kumar Sharma Etc (NTPC Employees CGHS Ltd)
(iii) the society has held only one AGM during the audit period; and
(iv) the society has not sought approval of the resignations of various members.
67. Apart from raising these objections, which certainly can't be read in favour of the society, the auditor P.K. Thirwani has also suggested that besides requiring improvement in various spheres, the society must fix cash retention limit and must issue share certificates to all the members.
68. Thus, it nowhere appears that the auditor has colluded with other conspirators or was discharging his functions under their influence. Had it been so, he would not raised such material objections regarding the functioning of the society. His job was to scrutinize the records of the society related to its accounting etc placed before him and to give his report which he appears to have done. He was not tasked to examine as to whether all the members/office bearers of the society are genuine or whether the records submitted in RCS office on behalf of the society were genuine. It was also not mandatory for him to visit the office of the society to examine its account books etc. After all, he was not conducting any spot inspection.
69. Further, Ld. PP has failed to point out how the audit report submitted by accused P.K. Thirwani had influenced the Assistant Registrar or the Registrar in approving the final membership list of the society.
CBI Case No. 187/2019 36 of 37 CBI Vs. Sushil Kumar Sharma Etc (NTPC Employees CGHS Ltd)
70. Hence, I do not find any evidence on record to link this accused with the conspiracy involved in this case. He is liable to be acquitted.
Decision:-
71. In the light of above discussion, the accused Gopal Singh Bisht and P.K. Thirwani are hereby acquitted of all the charges. However, the accused Sushil Kumar Sharma, Anna Wankhede and Sri Chand are hereby convicted as under:-
(i) all the three accused are convicted U/s 120B r/w section 420/468/471 IPC r/w section 13 (1) (d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988;
(ii) accused Sushil Kumar Sharma is also convicted u/s 420 IPC and u/s 471 IPC;
(iii) accused Anna Wankhede is also convicted u/s 420 IPC and U/s 468 IPC; and
(iv) accused Sri Chand is also convicted u/s 420 IPC.
Accused Sushil Kumar Sharma, Anna Wankhede and Sri Chand stand acquitted of the remaining charges framed against them.
Announced through Video Conferencing
on CISCO Webex Meetings App. on this
3rd Day of August, 2021 Digitally signed
by VIRENDER
VIRENDER BHAT
BHAT Date:
2021.08.03
17:29:08 +0530
(VIRENDER BHAT)
SPL. JUDGE (PC ACT), CBI-15,
ROUSE AVENUE DISTRICT COURT,
NEW DELHI
CBI Case No. 187/2019 37 of 37