Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 1340 (ALL)

Union of India v. P. N. Misra

2022-08-25

SHAMIM AHMED

body2022
JUDGMENT : SHAMIM AHMED, J. 1. The case is taken up in the revised call. 2. Heard Sri Shiv P. Shukla learned counsel for the appellant and Sri Ravi Shanker Tewari, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 to 3 and perused the material available on record. 3. The present leave to appeal under Section 378 Cr.P.C. has been filed against the judgment and order dated 10.04.2009 passed by the Special Judge, Anti- Corruption (Central), U.P. Lucknow in Case No. 15 of 1999, acquitting the respondents under Section 420, 468, 471 I.P.C. and Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. 4. The facts and circumstances leading to this case, in nut shell are that the then SP, CBI/SPE Lucknow registered a preliminary inquiry No. 11(A)/96 on 28-06-1996 on source of information. The said preliminary inquiry revealed that respondent no. namely Sri P.N. Mishra JTO Rajajipuram, Lucknow and respondent no. 2 namely Sri B.B. Singh Telephone Inspector, Rajajipuram, Lucknow while posted and functioning as such, entered into a criminal conspiracy with each other and some unknown person in order to commit the offense of cheating, forgery and criminal misconduct. in pursuance of common object of said criminal conspiracy Sri P.N. Mishra and Sri B.B. Singh dishonestly and fraudulently installed a new telephone connection No. 259928 on 24-11-1993 in the name of Smt. Nishi Khosla W/o Sri Puneet Khosla against L.P. No. 7532 dated 09-11-1993 OB No. 1137 with STD facility. The said telephone number was installed without observing the bona-fide and genuineness of the subscriber for a new telephone connection. The name and address of subscriber was fictitious and bogus, thus they abused their official position as public servants by installing the said new telephone connection in the name of Smt. Nishi Khosla. The aforesaid accused persons in criminal conspiracy with some unknown persons caused wrongful loss to the Telecom Department to the tune of Rs. 91,356/- approx and defrauded the Telecom Department. And on the basis of aforesaid preliminary inquiry the then SP, CBI registered a case vide Ext.Ka-18 and ordered investigation to be conducted by Sri B.S. Mishra Dy. SP CBI Lucknow and on the completion of investigation CBI submitted charge sheet Ext.Ka-24 u/s 120-B, 420, 468, 471 IPC and u/s 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of P.C. Act 1988 against the respondents for committing the alleged offenses. 5. SP CBI Lucknow and on the completion of investigation CBI submitted charge sheet Ext.Ka-24 u/s 120-B, 420, 468, 471 IPC and u/s 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of P.C. Act 1988 against the respondents for committing the alleged offenses. 5. The court below after taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and evidence available on record, passed the judgment and order of acquittal dated 10.04.2009. 6. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the court below did not appreciate the evidence on record. He further submits that prosecution has successfully proved the offence against the accused on the basis of evidence. The judgment was passed without considering the statement of witnesses and the case set up by the prosecution and the judgment of the acquittal was passed on surmises and conjectures. 7. Learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 to 3 submits that the present appeal is of the year, 2009. Moreover, there appears no illegality or infirmity in the judgment and order of acquittal passed by the court below, therefore, leave to appeal may be refused. 8. I have heard the learned counsel for the appellant and considered the ground as well as the argument advanced by learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 to 3 and gone through the judgment passed by the court below. 9. In the present case from the statements given by the witnesses produced by the prosecution, I found that prosecution has failed to establish that the crime in question has been committed by the accused and there was no direct evidence produced by the prosecution regarding involvement of the respondent Nos. 1 to 3 in the crime. 10. Further, learned counsel for the appellant could not point out any illegality or infirmity in the judgment and order of acquittal passed in favour of respondents which is before this Court. 11. Further, this Court observed that an appeal against acquittal stands on a different footing from the appeal against conviction. Hon'ble the Apex Court in a very recent judgment in the case of Sadhu Saran Singh vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Others, (2016) 4 SCC 357 has considered this difference and has observed in paragraph nos. 20 and 21 as under: “20. Generally, an appeal against acquittal has always been altogether on a different pedestal from that of an appeal against conviction. 20 and 21 as under: “20. Generally, an appeal against acquittal has always been altogether on a different pedestal from that of an appeal against conviction. In an appeal against acquittal where the presumption of innocence in favour of the accused is reinforced, the appellate court would interfere with the order of acquittal only when there is perversity of fact and law. However, we believe that the paramount consideration of the Court is to do substantial justice and avoid miscarriage of justice which can raise by acquitting the accused who is guilty of an offence. A miscarriage of justice that may occur by the acquittal of the guilty is no less than from the conviction of an innocent. This Court, while enunciating the principles with regard to the scope of powers of the appellate court in an appeal against acquittal, in Sambasiva vs. State of Kerala, 1998 SCC (Cri) 1320 has held: “7. The principles with regard to the scope of the powers of the appellate court in an appeal against acquittal, are well settled. The powers of the appellate court in an appeal against acquittal are no less than in an appeal against conviction. But where on the basis of evidence on record two views are reasonably possible the appellate court cannot substitute its view in the place of that of the trial court. It is only when the approach of the trial in acquitting an accused is found to be clearly erroneous in its consideration of evidence on record and in deducing conclusions therefrom that the appellate court can interfere with the order of acquittal.” 21. The Court, in several cases, has taken the consistent view that the appellate court, while dealing with an appeal against acquittal, has no absolute restriction in law to review and re-look the entire evidence on which the order of acquittal is founded. If the appellate court, on scrutiny, finds that the decision of the court below is based on erroneous views and against settled position of law, then the interference of the appellate court with such an order is imperative.” 12. In the light of the aforesaid guidelines, the impugned judgment has to be considered from the point of view whether the view taken by the court below was a probable view based on the material on record or it is an absolutely erroneous judgment devoid of merits. 13. In the light of the aforesaid guidelines, the impugned judgment has to be considered from the point of view whether the view taken by the court below was a probable view based on the material on record or it is an absolutely erroneous judgment devoid of merits. 13. A criminal trial proceeds with the presumption of innocence of the accused persons. With the acquittal of the accused persons this presumption of innocence stands fortified. So very strong and cogent reasons must exist in interfering the judgment of acquittal. 14. Keeping in view the aforesaid weakness of the prosecution case, as noted by the court below, I am of the view that the view taken by the court below was a probable and logical view, which is based on valid reasons. The judgment of the court below cannot be said to be illegal, illogical and improbable and not based on material on record or is based on erroneous views and is against the settled position of law. So, this Court is satisfied that there is absolutely no hope of success in this appeal and accordingly, no interference is called for. 15. Leave to appeal is refused. 16. Application for leave to appeal is rejected. 17. Accordingly, the appeal does not survive, and in view of above, the appeal is also dismissed. 18. No order as to costs. 19. Copy of this judgment be sent to the court below for its compliance.