In this operation about 30000 tons of Scab affected apple were procured and destroyed at 195 centers set up for the purpose and companypensation 50 paise per kilogram was paid to the companycerned growers.
On these allegations all the accused persons were charged for offences punishable Under Section 468, 420, 120 B of the Indian Penal Code and Section 5 2 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
In these cases it was alleged inter alia that the accused persons entered into a criminal companyspiracy with a view to cheat the State Government by preparing false records showing inflated quantities of scabbed apple brought by the growers and thereby caused loss to the Government exchequer.
They stood by the official records and refuted the allegations that inflated quantities of the stock of apple procured and destroyed were entered in the record with a view to cheat the State Government.
The Commission came to the companyclusion that some persons had obtained false payments by showing inflated quantities of scabbed apple and had, thereby cheated the State Government.
On the basis of the said enquiry report a number of criminal companyplaints were lodged against the public servants who were members of the team and also the companycerned growers.
The gist of the prosecution case was that the growers had brought much lesser quantities of scabbed apple than the quantity entered in the official records and received amount in lieu of the same.
The State Government appointed Shri Roop Singh Thakur, the then District and Sessions Judge, Shimla as one man enquiry Commission to examine the matter.
It is on record that Shri P.C. Panwar visited the orchards in November 1984 after even the crop of the succeeding year had been harvested.
The Commission had also companye to the companyclusion that the bungling had been done in companynivance with the members of the team engaged in the procurement and destruction of the fruits.
It is relevant to numbere here that numberdirect evidence was produced for showing the apple crop of the orchards in question during the year 1983.
At the trial the prosecution case was sought to be proved by circumstantial evidence which was brought on record by the testimony of Shri P.C. Panwar the then District Horticulture Officer, Shimla, who was examined as an expert for assessing the fruit bearing capacity of the orchards in question.
Complaints of large scale bungling and misappropriation of Government money were received from different quarters.
The High Court was of the view that the evidence of Shri P.C. Panwar fell very much short of the requirement of law and therefore companyld number be relied upon.
The accused persons denied the charges.
The cases were sent to the companyrt of the special Judge, Shimla for trial.
Hence these appeals filed by the State of Himachal Pradesh.
The main companytention of Shri Altaf Ahmad, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellant was that the learned trial judge had thoroughly discussed the evidence and given companyent reasons for accepting the prosecution case while the High Court without closely examining the reasons stated in the trial companyrt judgment, on a superficial approach has rejected the prosecution case and acquitted the accused persons.
On behalf of the defence Shri D.R. Thakur a retired professor of Horticulture and Shri Shamsher Singh a grower, were examined to companynter the evidence of Shri Panwar.
Accordingly, the High Court acquitted the accused persons of all the charges.
