Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

7. The matter pertained to the project 'Development of Hatia / Dhurva Dam, Ranchi, Jharkhand which was awarded to M/s Raj Construction by ITDC through work order dated 23.01.2015. Accused Afzal Ahmad was the Engineer In-charge of the said project and responsible for overall supervision of the project including forwarding of the bills for verification to the Architect and approvals for payment thereof.

8. The project was completed on 20.04.2016 and the final bill of Rs.24,31,373.12 was submitted by the contractor vide letter dated 16.01.2018. The site Engineer namely Amit recommended for payment of Rs.19,67,672/-. The payment was pending with the accused and not forwarded for signature of the Architect. Measurement book was not forwarded to the Architect and was kept pending.

10. The charge-sheet was submitted in the court on 29.06.2018. Cognizance of the offence was taken on 12.07.2018 against the accused.

11. Vide order on charge dated 17.05.2019 charges were framed against the accused for offences punishable under Section 7 and 13 (2) r/w Section 13 (1) (d) of PC Act 1988 to which accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

12. During the trial, prosecution examined 14 witnesses in all. The sum and substance of prosecution evidence is as follows:-

PW-1 Satyendra Kumar Singh is the complainant of the case. He is one of the partners of M/s Raj Construction which was engaged in the work of Hatia Dam, Ranchi in the year 2013. Complainant deposed that work was completed in the year 2016 and after completion of work, a bill of 19 Lacs remained pending with ITDC and same was not cleared till 2017. Complainant visited the ITDC office several times. Accused Afzal Ahmad, Senior Manager was the Incharge of the project and complainant met him after final bill was prepared and he asked him to get the bill signed from Architect. Complainant met Architect Garima who refused to sign the bill stating that payment has not been made to her by ITDC and further stated that she would sign only if she is given 1% of the total cost of the project. Complainant came to the accused Afzal Ahmad as it was not the responsibility of the complainant to get the bill signed from the architect. The accused said that the bill would be passed, however, some expenses would be incurred and the expenses would be around 1.5-2 Lakhs. The complainant expressed his inability to pay the amount in one go and asked to pay Rs.50,000 / 60,000/-and rest after payment of his pending bill. The complainant approached CBI with his complaint.

15. In his defence, accused has stated that he has been falsely implicated. Infact Architect was demanding money from the complainant. The complainant approached the accused with the grievance about Architect to which he asked him to give a formal complaint. The complainant even told the accused that he had already given bribe on different occasions to the Architect. In order to pay bribe to the Architect, the measurement book (MB) was manipulated by making interpolations at the instance of project engineer Amit Narayan. On checking the record, accused pointed out the said interpolations and found that the extra payment has been sought on account of underground work which was already completed in the year 2015. He called the project engineer and the contractor and pointed out to them about the above discrepancy. They verbally agreed before accused that they have done so to enable them to pay the bribe to Architect. Accused also disallowed the extra payment and made the endorsement on the record. Accused also warned the project engineer for making such manipulations. On 18.02.2018 the project engineer resigned from his job by sending an email to accused. He was contractual employee. According to accused, he has been framed under the conspiracy by the project engineer and contractor and he is innocent.

62. I have thoroughly examined and considered the defence statement (under Section 313 Cr.P.C) of the accused in the light of evidence appearing on record. According to accused Afzal Ahmad, the proceedings are manipulated and fabricated. The bribe money has been planted upon him. The accused pleaded innocence and false implication. According to the accused, money was demanded by architect and in this context, complainant approached him complaining about the architect. The accused suggested the complainant to give a formal complaint. It is also mentioned that complainant informed the accused that on earlier occasions also he gave bribe to the architect. The measurement book was manipulated for facilitating the payment of bribe to the architect and this was done at the instance of project engineer Amit Narayan. According to accused, he even confronted project engineer and contractor for this to which they verbally agreed and accused made endorsement on record and disallowed the extra payment and even warned the project engineer for such manipulation. It is further pleaded that project engineer resigned from the job by sending e-mail to the accused on 18.02.2018. The accused has been framed under the conspiracy by the project engineer and contractor.