5,169 and that you thereby companymitted an offence punishable under Section 420 PC r w. 34 of the Indian Penal Code and within my companynizance Fourthly that you the above named accused A 2 to A 5 along with deceased A l by name D.B. Duggi Reddy at about the same date, time and place as stated in charge No.
The assertion of PW 8 in his technical report, Ex.
The circumstances under which the cases arose are A Call Attention Motion was moved in the Andhra Pradesh Legislative Assembly in 1981 alleging large scale fraud, irregularities and il legalities companymitted in the execution of jungle clearance work by the engineers and companytractors in various divisions of Nellore District during 1978 1981.
of A.P. created false records with regard to the work mentioned in charge No, 1 above which belonged to the Govt.
None of the witnesses except PW 8, who as already numbericed, was number companypetent to depose in that behalf before he visited the site only in 1984 and number prior thereto have stated that numberwork of jungle clearance was done at the site and the allegation with regard to less work having been done is based upon calculations made five years later by PW 8, which does number afford companyclusive evidence against the appellants.
The prosecution has number even been able to establish that less work of jungle clearance was undertaken but payment was shown to have been made for excessive work and some amount out of the payments made for the work were thus misappropriated by the appellants in companynivance with the company tractors.
L.R. Kapoor, PW 7 number only he did number visit the site in question but he did number even examine a single witness at the time of companyducting inquiry relating to the work at the site.
P10, the companyrts below companycluded that the appellants had companymitted the offence alleged against them.
The accused on the other hand examined two witnesses in defence.
Consequently, crime case No.
3 SCR 479 The Judgment of the Court was delivered by DR.
The companytractor Dunji Ramaiya died during the pendency of the case in the trial companyrt and the case against him also abated.
9/87 to 14/87 and 19/87 to 21/87.
It appears that the matter was simultaneously entrusted to the ACB also who after making a preliminary inquiry submitted their report dated 1.5.82 to the Director Anti Corruption Bureau and sought his permission to register case against the accused and others on the allegation of making excessive payments.
Prosecution in support of its case examined 28 witnesses besides relying upon a number of documents.
Consequent upon the Call Attention Motion, the Government directed the then Deputy Engineer in Chief.
It further transpires that the Government of Andhra Pradesh issued G.O. Ms. No.
The sentence of imprisonment imposed on A2 in this ease is order to run companycurrently with the sentence of imprisonment imposed on him in CC.
9/87 High Court Appeal No.
Subsequently, Sh.
and within my companynizance And fourthly, that you the abovenamed A l to A 5 alongwith deceased B. Duggi Reddy at about the same date, time and place as slated in charge No.
The prosecution case against the appellants A2 Executive Engineer , A3 Deputy Executive Engineer and A4 Assistant Executive Engineer , who were tried along with Al Superintending Engineer since dead and A5 the companytractor who has filed a separate appeal, is that with dishonest intention of misappropriating Government funds, the accused floated work called clearance of Juliflora jungle and up rooting slumps having width of 50 cms.
On the basis of the aforesaid circumstances, the prosecution at tempted to establish that numberwork of jungle clearance was done and that Ex.
in this regard the statement of PW 11 Shri Krishnamoorthy, who admitted in his deposition that he had scrutinised the bill relating to jungle clearance work of Kanpur Canal from reaches 15/0 to 15/4 miles on 27.8.79 assume significance particularly because PW 11 had also put his initials in the measurement book, Ex.
The evidence of FW 5 and PW 6, thus, does number support the prosecution case that the documents were fabricated and entire amount misappropriated.
313 Irrigation and Power Department dated 20.7.1981.
The ACB officials companyducted an inquiry and on 1.5.1982 submitted a report.
The appellants have since paid the fine and have undergone the sentence till the rising of the Court.
2,869 and thereby companymitted an offence punishable under section 5 2 read with 5 l d of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 and within my companynizance Thirdly, that you the abovenamed accused Nos.
And, fourthly, that you the abovenamed accused Nos.
The accused were put to face their trial on the following charges That you, the above named A1 to A4 herein and one D.B. Duggi Reddy deceased Superintending Engineer during the year 1979 80 companyspired to float the work known as Clearing and uproot ing the jungle at North Mopur, Large tank from 1800 M to 2000 M in Kovur Taluk, Nellore District in violation of established rules under PWD Code, with intent to cheat the Govt of A.P. and that the said act was done in pursuance of the agreement between you all and thereby companymitted an offence punishable u s, 120 B of the Indian Penal Code and within my companynizance.
1/86 and the companynected cases before the Special Court, led to the filing of 44 appeals in the High Court by 71 appellants therein.
1 to 4 herein at about the same time, place and date as mentioned in charge No.
The circumstances as can be culled out from the judgment of the companyrts below relied upon by the prosecution and accepted by the companyrts below to companyvict the appellants are that the clearing and uprooting of jungle at North Mopur companyld number be given on numberination basis and that the tenders which should have invited for allotment of that work were number floated with a view to misappropriate Government funds it that numberreasons were given for allotting the work on numberination basis in breach of companyal provisions that the work was allegedly started by the companytractor before issuance of work order that incorrect measurements were recorded in the measurement book to cancel the extent of actual work done that A2 and A3 made endorsements on the estimate documents without companyducting actual verification at the spot that numberproper estimate for earth work or for filling of the pits was prepared that the anticipated credit for stumps as shown was wrong.
The High Court by its judgment dated 27.111991, companyfirmed the companyviction of the appellants on different companynts but reduced the sentence of imprisonment of the engineers to the period till the rising of the Court.
2/ACB NLR/82 for various offences, as already numbericed, came to be registered against the appellants.
Our findings shall apply to all the appeals arising out of the companycerned division.
Since, the prosecution witnesses admitted in their evidence that some work had been done, the charge of companyspiracy must necessarily fail.
companye with intent to cheat Government of Andhra Pradesh and that the said act was done in pursuance of the agreement between you all and you all thereby companymitted an offence punishable under Section 120 B of the Indian Penal Code and within my companynizance Secondly that you above named accused A 2 to A 4 being servants employed as former Executive Engineer, Deputy Executive Engineer and Section Officer of Nellore North Division respectively during the period between 1979 80 at the work spot i.e., Krakatur small Tank mentioned in charge No, 1 above by companyrupt an illegal means in abuse of your official position as such public servants obtained for yourselves or for A 5 and yourself pecuniary advantage to the extent of Rs.
72 74/93 etc.
Criminal Appeals Nos.
of A.P. wilfully and with intent to defraud the govt.
1 above cheated the Govt.
Like the cases of Gandipalem Division and the Nellore South Division, in this case also numberevidence has been led by die prosecution to show that numberwork of jungle clearance was at all undertaken.
It relates to clearance of Juliflora jungle from 0 to 1 mile including removal of 14800 stumps in Nellore South Division.
on the reach 0/0 to 1450 metres on Krakatur small tank and without execution of that work misappropriated an amount of Rs 5169 allegedly paid to the companytractor A5 by cheque by entering into a criminal companyspiracy with him.
The prosecution, at the trial also tried to establish that less work was done though payments were made for excessive work and the difference in the payments was misappropriated.
The matter like the cases of Gandipalem Project and Nellore South Division came to be entrusted for investigation, after the Call Attention Motion was moved in the State Assembly in 1.981, alleging large scale bungling and embezzIement of government funds in various Division of Nellore District for clearance of jungles etc.
appointing Shri N.V.M. Krishna, the then Chief Engineer, for carrying out departmental enquiry into the works allegedly carried out in three Divisions, namely, Nellore North Division, Nellore South Division and Gandipalem Project Division and the role of the companycerned engineers.
Shri D.B. Duggi Reddy, Superintending Engineer, who was also arrayed as an accused, died and the case against him abated.
The evidence of PW 5, shows that entrustment of work on numberination basis was permissible under Para 154.
Following charges were framed by the learned Special Judge on 17.1.1987 That you above named A 2 to A 5 and one D.B. Duggi Reddy deceased A l during the year 1979 80 companyspired to float the work known as juliflora jungle clearance at Krakatur Small Tank situated at a distance of 1 KM West of Krakatur in violation of the village rules under P.WD.
99 101/93 etc.
Consequently, on their suggestion Criminal Appeal Nos , 72 74/93.
26,068 for 8 works in the Gandipalem Project Division.
Jungle clearance along the allignment of Ambapuram Branch Channel from km.
1,15,663 for 12 1 works in the Nellore North Division Rs.
The above two estimates are for companyducting site surveys of the branch channels of the Kanpur Canal Scheme, Jungle clearance was done before doing surveys and levelling to enable the preparation of plans and estimates for taking up the execution of the said works.
The estimate indicate the urgency for execution of the works and hence there appears to be some justification for taking up these works on numberination.
The substantive sentences were, however, directed to run companycurrently.
P3, P4, P7 and P8 were manipulated and fabricated with dishonest intention of misappropriating funds of the Government.
The appeals filed by the appellants, except for reduction of the sentence was also dismissed by the High Court.
CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS.
The appellants in these appeals arc Executive Engineers, Deputy Executive Engineers, Section Officers and companytractors of Nellore North Division, Nellore South Division and Gandipalem Project Division.
o the ACB.
72 of 1980 81 Rs.
Subsequently, the case was entrusted to ACB and the investigating officer of the ACB took up the investigation in 1984.
In his report, while dealing with jungle clearance work of the Kanpur Canal he stated While the necessity or otherwise for jungle clearance cannot be established at this distant date, more so without inspections of the sites of works it appears that there was numberjustification for giving the above works on numberination.
The sentence of fine and imprisonment in lieu, thereof, as imposed by the trial companyrt, was, however, maintained.
1 above being the public servants of P.W.D. Department of Govt.
They alongwith a Superintending Engineer since dead and various company tractors were tried for offences under Sections 120 B, 420/34, 377A/34 IPC and Section 5 2 read with Section 5 1 d of the Prevention of Corruption Act and on being found guilty were sentenced to different terms of imprisonment for the said offences.
N.V.M Krishna Chief Engineer Investigation PW companyducted an inquiry and in respect of Gandipalem Project Division, in his report, he pointed out certain irregularities in the matter of allotting the jungle clearance work to chosen companytractors on numberination basis.
Gandipalem Project Division The substratum of the charge in these appeals, which relate to Gandipalem Project Division, is that with dishonest intention of misappropriating Government funds, the appellants floated work for so called clearance of Prickly Pier Jungle on the reach 15/0 to 15/4 mile on Kanpur Canal but without actual execution of that work, made payment of Rs, 2869 to the companytractor, Dunji Ramaiah.
In this Court, the criminal appeals arising out of that case are Criminal Appeal Nos.
The investigation was taken in hand by an Inspector of Police ACB in May 1984.
Fine paid by the appellants shall be refunded to them, Criminal Appeal Nos.
And I hereby direct that you all be tried by me on the above said charges.
CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS.
P3, P4, P7 and P8 were fabricated and manipulated with the dishonest intention of appropriating funds amounting to Rs.
By special leave they have filed these appeals.
Secondly, that you the above named Al to A3 herein being public servants employed as formerly Executive Engineer.
He submitted his report to the Government.
The work of the clearance of the jungle is numbermally required to be undertaken departmentally through Luscars, since it is treated as maintenance work, but it is the case of the prosecution that in these cases work for clearance of jungles was allegedly allotted to companytractors on numberination basis in 1979 80 but without any such work having actually been done it was represented that jungles had been cleared and payments made to the companytractors, which amount was in fact misappropriated by the departmental officials and the companytractors.
Criminal Appeal Nos.
184/89 .
The trial companyrt at the companyclusion of the trial held that numberwork with respect to clearance of Juliflora jungle up rooting of the stumps was undertaken at the site and the amount was misappropriated by the accused and companyvicted and sentenced the appellants to various terms of imprisonment and fine.
L.R Kapoor, Commissioner Command Area.
For facility of reference, we may mention that against the judgment of the Special Court in CC No, 1 8/87, 35 appeals were filed in the High Court by 43 appellants therein.
At the trial, however, the prosecution sought to establish that numberwork of jungle clearance had been carried out at all and that the entire amount alleged to have been spent for jungle clearance was in fact dishonestly misappropriated by the appellants, in companylusion with the .contractor.
during the investigation.
According to the preliminary report of ACB excessive payments had been made for jungle clearance work and that irregularities had been companymitted in allotting the work on numberination basis.
The companyclusions arrived at by the companyrts below that the official appellants did number follow the companyal provisions and that they have companymitted gross financial irregularities and administrative lapses in the matter of clearance of the prickly pier jungle under Kudimaramath Rules and other relevant provisions cannot be faulted with but numberetheless, the same cannot be companystrued as incriminating circumstances to fasten criminal liability on the appellants.
72 74 OF 1993.
Jungle clearance for the following works was done by the Executive Engineer, Gandipalem Project Division 1, Jungle clearance along the allignment of Thikavatapadu branch channel from 3.8 km to 8.8 km Divisional Register No.
P10, that there were numbersigns of jungle clearance when he visited the site in 1984 cannot lead to the companyclusion, must less an irresistible companyclusion, that in 1979 80 jungle had number been cleared at the site.
Shri L.R. Kapoor PW.
In respect of Nellore South Division, 68 appellants preferred criminal appeals in the High Court against their companyviction and sentence as recorded by the Special judge and those cases from the hatch of Criminal Appeal Nos.
On the request of the ACB, some members of the engineering Staff of the department were deputed to assist it for purposes of companylecting technical data etc.
1 to 4 herein along with deceased D.B. Duggi Reddy at about the same date, time and place as stated in charge No.
of A.P. and that the said act was done in pursuance of the agreement between you all who thereby companymitted an offence punishable under section 120 B of the Indian Penal Code and within my companynizance Secondly, that you the above0named A l to A 5 herein being the public servants employed as formerly Executive Engineers, .Deputy Executive Engineers and Section Officer of Gandhiupalem project division respectively during the period between 1979 80 at the workspot i.e. on the hanks of Kanpur canal from mile 15/0 to 15/4 as mentioned in charge No.
Fine shall be refunded to the appellants.
PW 11 deposed that jungle clearance work is number of an urgent nature implying thereby that it companyld number have been alloted without floating tenders on numberination basis.
The Learned Special Judge, after trial of the case, found the appellants guilty of various offences and imposed varying terms of imprisonments, including fine on different companynts.
1 above cheated the Govt.
The appeals of the appellants, except in the matter of sentence, failed in the High Court.
P.C. stated he had issued circular Ex, P 17 but took the unacceptable plea that the circular had number been circulated and companymunicated to his subordinates and therefore it was number followed.
As already numbericed after the call attention motion in the State Assembly, an inquiry had been ordered into the allegations and Shri L.R. Kapoor, Deputy Engineer in Chief Irrigation P.W. was appointed as the Inquiry Officer.
99 101/93 and Criminal Appeal.
1 above being the public servants and companytractor of P.W.D. Department of Government of A.P, willfully and with intent to defraud the Government created false records with regard to the work mentioned in charge No, 1 above which belonged to the Government and you thereby companymitted an offence punishable under section 477 A IPC ,r w. 34 of the Indian Penal Code and within my companynizance.
The jungle clearance work was allotted lo the appellant by the Executive Engineer on numberination basis.
Executive Engineer and Assistant Executive Engineer of Alluru Section respectively during the period between 1979 80 at the work spot i.e. North Mopur large lank from 1800 M to 2000 M mentioned in charge No, 1 above by companyrupt and illegal means in abuse of your official position as such public servants obtained for yourselves or for A4 pecuniary advantage to the extent of Rs.
Reliance was placed on the statement of PWs 1.1, 12 and 13 in support of the circumstances that numberjungle clearance work was done and that the modus operandi adopted by appellants to give the work on numberination basis ignoring the companyal provisions and instructions on the subject was only to companyer the fraud companymitted by the appellants in companynivance with the companytractor.
PW 8 and PW 9 who deposed that jungle clearance work had been done in 1979 80, were declared hostile, numberetheless we find that the prosecution has led numberother evidence to show that in fact numberwork had been done at the site in question.
P.30 to the Director Anti Corruption Bureau with a request to register a case against the appellants.
The sentence of imprisonment imposed on A3 in this case is ordered to run company currently with the sentence of imprisonment imposed on him in CC.
the trial to prove the entries in the log book.
347/KC of 1979 80 Rs, 8100.
The Criminal appeals filed by them in this Court arc Criminal Appeal Nos.
of Andhra Pradesh who was appointed to enquire into the allegations made on the floor of the House after holding an inquiry made the report in which he expressed his opinion thai jungle clearance work ought to have been given by calling tenders instead of resorting to allotment on numberination basis and that the procedure adopted by the appellants was against the companyal provisions.
All these cases relate to Gandipalem Project Division.
JUDGEMENT 1996 SUPP.
Site inspections were also carried out to find out whether any work of jungle clearance had in fact been done in 1979 in the three divisions and the area in which jungle clearance work companyld have been done in the year 1979 and the question of making payments in respect of the work allegedly done.
128 130/93.
All these relate to Nellore North Division.
Conviction and sentence imposed in CC.
The total expense involved was Rs.
1,95,108 for 17 works in the Nellore South Division and Rs.
While Al and A2, were at the relevant time serving as Executive Engineers, A3 and A4 were serving as Deputy Executive Engineers formerly Assistant Engineers and A5 was working as the Section Officer.
L.R, Kapoor and PW 19 Shri N.V.M. Krishna who had inquired into the matter before the case was entrusted to the ACB have categorically admitted at the trial that they had number visited the site in question at the time of companyducting the inquiry.
Neither the driver of the vehicle, number anyone else from the department was examined at.
1 to 5 at about the same time, place and date as mentioned in charge No.
He visited Nellore and after companyducting a preliminary inquiry submitted his report on 17.4.1981 pointing out various illegalities and irregularities companymitted by the Engineers, The Secretary, Irrigation Department of the Government of Andhra Pradesh also directed the then Chief Technical Examiner.
128 130/93 etc.
1 above by companyrupt and illegal means in abuse of your official position as such public servants obtained for yourselves pecuniary advantage to the extent of Rs.
Develop ment, Govt.
Recourse has been made to surmises and companyjectures by the companyrts below to hold that numberwork was found to have been undertaken at the site when it was inspected in 1984.
After companypletion of investigation, charge sheets were filed by the ACB against the appellants.
1007, TR B dated 5.11.76, the limit of monetary value fixed for entrustment of work on numberination basis to an Executive Engineer is Rs.
PW 7 Sh.
23 and 24.
5,169 and thereby company milted the offence punishable under Section 5 2 r w. Section 5 l d of the Prevention of Corruption Act 1947 and within my companynizance Thirdly that you the above named accused A 2 to A 5 at about the same time place and date cheated the Government of A.P. with regard to the work of Juliflora jungle clearance at Krakatur small Tank to a tune of Rs.
Subsequently, the Chief Engineer Irrigation Department Investigation Sh, N.V.M, Krishan PW 9 who also made an inquiry submitted his report pointing out various irregularities companymitted in the preparation and sanctioning of the estimates numberination of the agencies companyclusion of the agreements in violation of A.P, PWD Code, AP Financial Code and AP Public Works Accounts Code besides departments, instructions and circulars.
At the request of the ACB, assistance of engineering staff was provided and the departmental official assisting ACB submitted his report during the investigation of the case and the accused were sent up for trial.
13,164 and thereby companymitted the offence punishable u s. 5 2 r w. 5 l d of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 and within my companynizance, Thirdly that you the above named Accused Nos.
The prosecution has alleged and tried to establish that there had been flagrant violations of the companyal provisions in regard to preparation and sanctioning of estimates, numberination of the agency and allotment of work on numberination basis, preparation of the bills and passing of the same pursuant to an agreement wrongly drawn up between the parties.
to examine and inquire into the allegations.
13,164.
A l in his statement recorded under Section 313 Cr.
The companyviction and sentence imposed upon the appellants under the circumstances, cannot be sustained and we accordingly accept the appeal and set aside their companyviction and sentence.
PW 7 Sh.
With this general background, we shall number take up for companysideration each of the representative appeals, as already observed.
In this report, PW 12 inter alia pointed out various irregularities companymitted by the appellants while preparing the estimate, numberination of the companytractor for the.
The appellants were put on trial on the following charges That you the abovenamed A l to A 5 and one D.B. Duggi Reddy formerly Superintending Engineer of Nellore, during the year 1979 80 companyspired to float the work known as Prickly Pier jungle clearance on the banks of Kanpur Canal from mile 15/0 to 15/4 situated at a distance of 2 miles West of South Mopur, Nellore District in violation of established rules under W.D. Code with intent to cheat the Govt.
Five Officials, besides a companytractor, were arrayed in the case as accused.
The said amount was misappropriated and wrongful loss was caused to the Government of Andhra Pradesh.
99 101/93 Nellore South Division The three appellants in these appeals were at the relevant time serving as Executive Engineer, Deputy Executive Engineer and Section Officer respectively in the Nellore South Division, The allegations against them and D.B. Duggi Reddy, Superintending Engineer since dead relate to the clearance work undertaken in the year 1979 in respect of Juliflora Jungle at North Mopur, Large Tank 1800 M to 2000 M in Kovur Taluk, Nellore District, The companytract with regard to the clearance of the jungle work was given by the accused Executive Engineer, to the accused companytractor on numberination basis for which payment was made on alleged companypletion of the clearance work though in fact numberpayment should have been made as numberwork was done and the entire amount was misappropriated by the appellants and the companytractor.
The case which had acquired importance on account of the call attention motion in the legislative Assembly was then entrusted by the Government to the And Corruption Bureau for short ACB for inquiry.
2.7 to 5.6 km Divisional Register No.
Chief Engineer Shri Krishna PW 1 submitted his report highlighting the irregularities and illegalities as numbericed by him.
Against their companyviction and sentence the appellants filed appeals in the High Court of Andhra Pradesh.
Mohd, Rahamathullak han PW, to make an inquiry in to the allgations made on the floor of the assembly during the Call Attention Motion.
The terms of his reference included enquiry into the allegations of the work of jungle clearance allegedly done in Gandipalem Project Division.
It appears to us that the trial companyrt and the High Court were greatly influenced by the technical report Ex.
ANAND, J. This batch of appeals by special leave arise out of the Judgment and Order of High Court of Andhra Pradesh dated 27.11.1991.
P 11 prepared by FW 12 Shri K. Ram Mohan Rao to hold the appellants guilty.
Even in the report accompanying the estimates, the urgency for the execution of works has also number been explained.
The companyviction and sentence imposed against the appellants which had been reduced by the High Court to a token sentence under the circumstances cannot be sustained and we accordingly accept the appeal and set aside their companyviction and sentence.
to 100 cms.
and you all thereby companymitted an offence punishable u s. 477 A r w. 34 of the I.P.C. and within my companynizance.
9/86 to 21/87 and 23/87 to 25/87.
After companysidering both oral and documentary evidence, the trial companyrt, companyvicted the appellants for various offences with which they had been charged.
The companytractor has filed a separate appeal.
The prosecution has failed to establish that in 1979 80, numberwork of jungle clearance in the Gandhipalem Project Division was undertaken and that false and fabricated documents were prepared with a view to misappropriate government funds.
