Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 532 (GAU)

Jaydev Das v. Central Bureau Of Investigation

2020-05-29

MANISH CHOUDHURY

body2020
JUDGMENT Manish Choudhury, J. - Heard Mr. Z. Kamar, learned Senior counsel assisted by Mr. U. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. P. Das, learned Standing counsel for the respondent CBI. 2. This criminal petition under Section 482 read with Sections 397/401, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (''the Code'' or ''the CrPC, for short), is preferred for setting aside and quashing of the criminal proceeding pertaining to CBI Special Case No. 2/2010 (C.B.I vs. Jaydev Das) against the petitioner arising out of First Information Report (FIR) no. R.C. 0172010A0002 dated 28.01.2010, which is pending in the Court of learned Special Judge, CBI, Assam, Guwahati (''the trial court'', for short), and the order dated 14.08.2013 passed by the learned trial court whereby charges were framed against the accused-petitioner under Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 against the petitioner as the sole accused. 3. The background facts which led to the registration of the First Information Report (FIR) no. R.C. 017201040002 against the accused-petitioner can be stated, in brief, as under : wxyz 3.1) On receipt of reliable source information, the FIR was registered on 28.01.2010 under Section 109, Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (''the PC Act'', for short) against the petitioner and his wife, Smti. Kumkum Das as accused. As per the allegations made in the said information and the FIR, the accused-petitioner while being posted and functioning as Chief Manager of Allahabad Bank, Lakhtokia Branch, Guwahati during January 2006 to 21.02.2008, by abusing his official position in the capacity of public servant and by corrupt and illegal means, had amassed huge immovable and movable properties to the tune of Rs. 17,76,881/- which were found highly disproportionate to his known sources of income and when he was interrogated, he could not explain it satisfactorily. It was further alleged that the accused-petitioner was in possession of disproportionate assets worth Rs. 29,35,403/- in his name and in the name of his wife and further, his family members had also wrongfully abetted the commission of the offences. Thus, the FIR was registered against the accused-petitioner and his wife, Smti. Kumkum Das. It was further alleged that the accused-petitioner was in possession of disproportionate assets worth Rs. 29,35,403/- in his name and in the name of his wife and further, his family members had also wrongfully abetted the commission of the offences. Thus, the FIR was registered against the accused-petitioner and his wife, Smti. Kumkum Das. zyxw wxyz 3.2) After registration of the FIR, investigation was initiated and after completion of investigation, the Investigating Officer (I.O.) of the case had submitted a charge sheet under Section 173, CrPC on 31.12.2010 finding a prima facie case to proceed against the accusedpetitioner for commission of offences punishable under Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1) (e) of the PC Act on the basis of the materials collected during the course of investigation. The I.O. had mentioned that during the course of investigation, evidence had not come on record to prove that Smti. Kumkum Das committed the offence under Section 109, IPC and, thus, she was not charge sheeted for the said offence. On receipt of the charge sheet, the learned trial court issued summons to the accused-petitioner who, on receipt of the same, had entered appearance before the learned trial court. The copies under Section 207, CrPC were furnished to the accused-petitioner and after going through the same, it was urged on behalf of the accused-petitioner for his discharge at the stage of consideration of charge. zyxw wxyz 3.3) The learned trial court by the impugned order dated 14.08.2013 framed charges against the accused-petitioner for offences under Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(e) of the PC Act. The charges on being read over and explained to the accusedpetitioner, he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. zyxw 4. This criminal petition has been preferred thereafter with the prayers, mentioned hereinabove. 5. It is submitted by Mr. Kamar, learned Senior counsel, who used to represent the accused-petitioner, Jaydev Das that Jaydev Das had, in the meantime, expired on 31.10.2018. In support of the said submission, Mr. Kamar has submitted a copy of the death certificate issued by the Registrar of Births & Deaths, Guwahati Municipal Corporation dated 27.11.2018. Ms. Das, learned standing counsel appearing for the respondent CBI has also endorsed the said submission made on behalf of the accused-petitioner. 6. Both Mr. Kamar, who used to represent accused-petitioner, Jaydev Das in this criminal petition and Ms. Ms. Das, learned standing counsel appearing for the respondent CBI has also endorsed the said submission made on behalf of the accused-petitioner. 6. Both Mr. Kamar, who used to represent accused-petitioner, Jaydev Das in this criminal petition and Ms. Das, Standing counsel, CBI have submitted, in unison, that the criminal prosecution launched against Sri Jaydev Das in view of his death on 31.10.2018, stands abated. Therefore, there is no reason to continue with this criminal petition seeking reliefs, indicated above. 7. It is apt to refer to observations made by the Supreme Court of India in the case of U. Subhadramma and others vs. State of Andhra Pradesh, (2016) 7 SCC 797 : wxyz "8.................................. Concept of abatement of a trial could be subsumed in the section where the final judgment and order of the criminal court is one of acquittal. In this context, the presumption of innocence of an accused till he is convicted must be borne in mind and there is no reason to consider this presumption to have vaporised upon the death of an accused. It may be noted that this Court has time and again reiterated the presumption of innocence of an accused till he is convicted. zyxw wxyz 9.................................. It is too well settled that a prosecution cannot continue against a dead person. A fortiori a criminal court cannot continue proceedings against a dead person and find him guilty. Such proceedings and the findings are contrary to the very foundation of criminal jurisprudence. In such a case the accused does not exist and cannot be convicted." zyxw 8. The meaning ascribed to the word ''abatement'' in P. Ramanatha Aiyar''s the Law Lexicon, 5th Edition is that ''In Criminal Law : abatement of proceedings connotes their termination without any decision on the merits and without the assent of the prosecutor''. 9. From the assertions of the learned counsel for the parties and from the death certificate so placed on record by Mr. Kamar, learned Senior counsel for the accused-petitioner, it is noticed that the death of Jaydev Das had occurred on 31.10.2018. In view of such death, the criminal prosecution launched against him through FIR no. R.C. 0172010A0002; charge sheet dated 31.12.2010 and Special Case no. Kamar, learned Senior counsel for the accused-petitioner, it is noticed that the death of Jaydev Das had occurred on 31.10.2018. In view of such death, the criminal prosecution launched against him through FIR no. R.C. 0172010A0002; charge sheet dated 31.12.2010 and Special Case no. 02/2010, presently pending before the Court of learned Special Judge, CBI, Assam, Guwahati shall have to be considered as abated in view of the fact that Jaydev Das was the sole accused facing such criminal persecution. 10. In view of such abatement of the aforesaid criminal prosecution against Jaydev Das, this criminal petition seeking quashment and setting aside of criminal proceeding in Special Case no. 02/2010 (C.B.I vs. Jaydev Das) pending in the Court of learned Special Judge, CBI, Assam, Guwahati and the order dated 14.08.2013 passed by the learned Special Judge, CBI, Assam, Guwahati in the said case framing charges against Jaydev Das under Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(e) of the PC Act have been rendered infructuous. 11. A copy of the death certificate issued on 27.11.2018 in respect of Jaydev Das, placed by Mr. Kamar, is to be kept with the record. 12. A copy of this order be furnished to Ms. P. Das, learned counsel appearing for respondent CBI, as per request, for further necessary action.