Document Fragment View
Matching Fragments
14.11 It is also important to mention that even as per the testimony of some prosecution witnesses of BHEL, there were various items which were received as 'freebies' along with the forge press.
14.12 I would also like to highlight that prosecution should have brought a clear picture before the Court that despite obtaining 9000 MT forge press and QIE/ESR, CFFP was not able to process the local orders and that there was no reduction/cut in import. Testimony of PW14 Sh. Akash Deepak does not serve the requisite purpose. He simply claimed that imports were made during 29.03.1994 to 31.03.1996 also while supplementing that the general reason for import was "Customer Restrictions" as well as "Constraints on the part of CFFP". A chart (Ex. PW14/2) was also placed on record by him. He, however, did not recall whether any letter was received from CFFP showing its inability with respect to forging orders. As regards "customer restriction", he clarified that it meant that customer provided its approved list of vendors for that particular product. Thus, if client wanted a particular product to be imported, instead of being manufactured at CFFP, CFFP cannot be blamed which was only a feeder unit, not entertaining direct orders from outside. Prosecution has not been able to place on record sufficient material which may indicate that 9000 MT forge press and QIE/ESR did not prove to be handy and substantial and that there was actually no reduction/cut in import.