SHIV SHANKAR PRASAD SINGH versus THE STATE OF BIHAR

Citation: [2019] 3 S.C.R. 1078 · Decided: 28-02-2019 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1078                    SUPREME COURT REPORTS            [2019] 3 S.C.R.
SHIV SHANKAR PRASAD SINGH
v.
THE STATE OF BIHAR
(Criminal Appeal No. 1804 of  2011)
FEBRUARY 28, 2019
[ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE AND
R. SUBHASH REDDY, JJ.]
Penal Code, 1860 – ss.409, 477A r/w. s.120B – Prevention of
Corruption Act, 1947 – s.5(2) r/w. s.5(1)(c) and (d) – Prosecution
case was that appellant-accused persons conspired and
misappropriated the bags of fertilizers and made false entries in
the records – On the basis of the complaint, FIR was registered –
Appellants-accused Nos.3 & 1 were convicted by Special Judge,
CBI for offence u/s.120B r/w. ss.409 & 477A of IPC and also for
the offences u/s.5(1)(d) of the  P.C. Act punishable u/s.5(2) thereof
– High Court confirmed the conviction – On appeal, held:
Considering the totality of oral and documentary evidence on
record, the prosecution proved the guilt of the accused beyond the
reasonable doubt – Apart from the allegation of misappropriation
with original intent there is specific case of the prosecution that all
the accused had conspired – Thus, appellants to serve the remaining
sentence.
Dismissing the appeals, the Court
HELD: 1.  At the outset, it is to be noted that the initial
complaint was lodged alleging misappropriation of only 540 bags
of urea but investigation revealed that entire 1040 bags of urea
was misappropriated.  It is the specific allegation of the
prosecution that the appellants and other accused have conspired
with criminal intent and indulged in the falsification of accounts.
Out of 1040 bags of urea, 500 bags were shown to have loaded in
the trucks bearing nos.BRI-7851 and BHF-3155 with 250 bags
each for delivering the same at Food Corporation of India (F.C.I.)
godown at Tilrath but it was found that there was no actual delivery
of such fertiliser bags and the F.C.I. records were falsified. The
specific case of the prosecution against appellant-accused no.3
[2019] 3 S.C.R. 1078
1078
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1079
of 2011 is that he was responsible for making entries in the
register at the gate and he has made false entries of arrival of
such 500 bags of urea though such fertiliser was not actually
delivered. Similarly and correspondingly, in the further registers
in ‘O’ Form and ‘G’ Form, false entries were made for which
appellant-accused no.1 is responsible.  Merely because
misappropriation of 540 bags of urea is mentioned in the initial
complaint, one cannot ignore the chargesheet which was filed
after investigation which revealed misappropriation of entire
quantity of 1040 bags of urea. Same is clear from the deposition
of the investigating officer who was examined as P.W.21.  It is
clear from the evidence on record, that so far as 500 bags of urea
are concerned though they were loaded in the two trucks bearing
nos.BRI-7851 and BHF-3155 but they were not taken to the F.C.I.
godown at Tilrath and false entries were made in the main gate
register and other registers which are being maintained in ‘O’
Form and ‘G’ Form to show as if such quantity of fertiliser was
delivered. [Para 19][1085-G-H; 1086-A-D]
2. Considering the totality of oral and documentary evidence
on record, the prosecution has proved the guilt of the accused
beyond reasonable doubt. Having regard to evidence on record,
it cannot be said that findings recorded by the trial court, as
affirmed by the appellate court, are either perverse or erroneous
so as to interfere with the same. Apart from the allegation of
misappropriation with criminal intent there is specific case of the
prosecution that all the accused have conspired and are
punishable for offence under Section 120B of the I.P.C. It is further
to be noted that Special Leave Petition filed by the other accused,
is already dismissed by this Court. [Para 22][1087-D-F]
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal
No. 1804 of 2011.
From the Judgment and Order dated 17.02.2009 of the High Court
of Judicature at Patna in Crl. Appeal No. 281 of 1997 (SJ).
With
Criminal Appeal No. 1805 of 2011.
Santosh Mishra, Manish Kumar, Ms. Sharmila Upadhyay,
Ms. Aparajita Singh, T. Mahipal, Advs. for the Appellant.
SHIV SHANKAR PRASAD SINGH v. THE STATE OF BIHAR
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1080                    SUPREME COURT REPORTS            [2019] 3 S.C.R.
P. K. Dey, A. K. Srivastava, Arvind Kumar Sharma, Ashok Kumar
Srivastava,  Advs. for the Respondent.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
R. SUBHASH REDDY, J.
1. These two criminal appeals, arising out of J

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.