Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

Meenakshi Madan Rai, J.

1. The Accused/Appellant was charged with a total of thirteen counts, for offences under Sections 419, 420, 468, 471 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, (hereinafter, the "IPC"), and one count under Section 13(1)(d)(i) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, (hereinafter, the "PC" Act). It is alleged that he defalcated a total sum of ₹ 62,511/- (Rupees sixty two thousand five hundred and eleven) only, during the period January, 2012 to May, 2012, from the Department of Economics, Statistics, Monitoring and Evaluation (for short, the "DESM&E"), Government of Sikkim, where he was serving on deputation as a Deputy Director (Administration). The Appellant entered a plea of "not guilty" to the Charges. On conclusion of the trial he was convicted of all the offences (supra), vide the impugned Judgment, dated 29- Trilochan Kapoor Sharma vs. State of Sikkim 09-2018, in Sessions Trial (Vigilance) Case No.01 of 2017, of the Court of the Special Judge, Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, South Sikkim, at Namchi. By the assailed Order on Sentence of the same date, for the offences under the IPC, he was sentenced to 6 months simple imprisonment under each count, with fine imposed and default clause of imprisonment. For the offence under the PC Act, he was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year with fine imposed and a default clause of imprisonment. The sentences of imprisonment were ordered to run concurrently, setting off the period of imprisonment already undergone by the Appellant during the investigation and trial. Aggrieved thereof, he is before this Court.

4. The questions that fall for consideration before this Court are;

(i) Whether the Appellant is entitled to the benefit of Section 84 of the Cr.P.C.?

(ii) Whether the Sanction for Prosecution is valid?

(iii) Whether the Appellant had committed the offences as charged?

(i) Before dealing with the afore framed questions, the facts are briefly being narrated herein, to comprehend the matter in its entirety. The Prosecution case is that the Vigilance Department, Government of Sikkim, on receipt of a reference from P.W.8, Director General-cum-Secretary, DESM&E, Government of Sikkim, alleging that the Appellant on the strength of forged and fabricated documents created false entities, purporting to be one Trilochan Kapoor Sharma vs. State of Sikkim Priya Sharma, LDC and one Ranjit Rai, MR Driver, fraudulently prepared salary bills in their names and misappropriated the money. A preliminary enquiry was conducted by P.W.43 of the Vigilance Department, which revealed that the DESM&E had received two transfer Orders sometime in the month of January, 2012. The first one pertaining to one Priya Sharma, LDC, (Exhibit

20), dated 21-01-2012, allegedly issued by Department of Personnel, Administrative Reforms, Training and Public Grievances (hereinafter, "DoPART"), indicating her transfer from the Human Resource Development Department, (hereinafter, the "HRDD"), District Office, North Sikkim, to DESM&E, Gangtok. A second Order, dated 16-02-2012 (Exhibit 22), was also received relieving her from duty in North Sikkim and her last pay certificate, Exhibit 13, dated 11-02-2012, allegedly issued by the HRDD. The transfer Order pertaining to one Ranjit Rai said to be a driver on the Muster Rolls of the Health and Family Welfare, Government of Sikkim (hereinafter, the "Health Department"), (Exhibit 19), dated 16-01- 2012, was alleged to have been issued by the Deputy Director, transferring him to DESM&E, Gangtok. The Appellant submitted documents, purporting to be joining Reports in respect of the two individuals named above Exhibit 21, for Priya Sharma and Exhibit 18, for Ranjit Rai. Thereafter, he arranged for withdrawal of their salaries, received and misappropriated the salary amounts, fraudulently drawing a sum of ₹ 62,511/- (Rupees sixty two thousand five hundred and eleven) only. ₹ 45,186/- (Rupees forty five thousand one hundred and eighty six) only, was drawn in respect of Priya Sharma, LDC for three months, (Feburary, 2012 to April, 2012). ₹ 17,325/- (Rupees seventeen thousand three hundred and twenty five) only, was drawn in respect of MR Driver, Trilochan Kapoor Sharma vs. State of Sikkim Ranjit Rai, for four months (January, 2012, to April, 2012). No person by the name of Priya Sharma was ever employed in the HRDD and the person by the name of Ranjit Rai did not exist in the Health Department. Hence, all of the documents mentioned above were found to be fraudulent. When the fraud was detected, the Appellant was confronted by P.W.8, upon which he submitted, Exhibit 17, an apology letter admitting to the aforementioned acts of impropriety. Hence, a criminal case was registered against the Appellant under Sections 468, 471, 420/477A of the IPC read with Section 13(1)(d)(ii) of the PC Act and endorsed to P.W.49, Police Inspector (PI) L.B. Chettri for investigation. Investigation inter alia revealed that the Appellant was posted on deputation in the DESM&E office, Gangtok from IRBn, Piplay, West Sikkim, vide Office Order dated 09-12-2011, as an Administrative Officer from 17-12-2011 to 27-01-2012. He was promoted on 28-01-2012 as Deputy Director and while in charge of the Administration in the office, committed the offences as Charged. Based on the investigation, Charge-Sheet was submitted by P.W.49 against the Appellant under Sections 420, 468, 471, 416, 419, 201 of the IPC and under Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the PC Act.

5. The findings of the Learned Trial Court in the impugned Judgment are being briefly examined. The Learned Trial Court dealt firstly with the question as to whether the Accused was a public servant during the relevant time and concluded that he was, in light of the Prosecution evidence and the fact being undisputed by the Appellant. The second question dealt with by the Learned Trial Court was whether the Accused being the Deputy Director, DESM&E, had on the strength of forged and fabricated documents, created false entities of Priya Sharma as LDC and Ranjit Rai as Trilochan Kapoor Sharma vs. State of Sikkim Muster Roll (MR) Driver and fraudulently prepared, drawn their salaries and misappropriated the same. The Court found that the enquiry of P.W.43 led to the finding that salary was fraudulently drawn in the name of Ranjit Rai amounting to ₹ 17,325/- (Rupees seventeen thousand three hundred and twenty five) only, for 4 months from January, 2012 to April, 2012 and for Priya Sharma ₹ 45,186/- (Rupees forty five thousand one hundred and eight six) only, for 3 months from February, 2012 to April, 2012, of a total sum of ₹ 62,511/- (Rupees sixty two thousand five hundred and eleven), only. P.Ws 2 and 6, both Officers of DESM&E had deposed with regard to Exhibits 9 and 10, Files of the Department. P.W.6 harbouring doubts about the documents pertaining to Priya Sharma and Ranjit Rai, processed Files, Exhibits 9 and 10 and forwarded it to the concerned Departments, for verification. The Health Department informed that the Office Order of Ranjit Rai was not issued by the Department and the HRDD opined that the documents pertaining to Priya Sharma were fake. The evidence of P.W.7 with regard to Exhibit 18 (supra), Exhibit 19 (supra), Exhibit 20 (supra), Exhibit 21 (supra), were examined and found to be fake by the Court. P.W.7 was aware about Exhibit 17, the apology letter and deposed accordingly. Exhibits 23 to 56 supporting various aspects of the Prosecution case were also examined. The Learned Trial Court on consideration of the evidence of Prosecution Witnesses and the documentary evidence, concluded that, Ranjit Rai and Priya Sharma were not employees of DESM&E nor were they ever employed under any Government Department in any District. It was the Accused who had fabricated transfer Orders and joining Reports of Ranjit Rai and Priya Sharma, and collected Trilochan Kapoor Sharma vs. State of Sikkim their salaries from the Office of the DESM&E, unsuspected by the staff of the Department.