IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. Cr. A. No. : 245 of 2005. Decided on: 31st May, 2011. _________________________________________________________ State of Himachal Pradesh. …Appellant. -Versus- J.S. Parihar and others. …Respondents. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Surjit Singh, Judge. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. __________________________________________________________ For the appellant : Mr. J.S. Guleria, Assistant Advocate General. For the respondents. : M/s. Satyen Vaidya, Ajay Kochhar and M.S. Kanwar, Advocates. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rajiv Sharma, Judge(Oral) : State has filed this appeal against the judgment dated 15.03.2005, rendered by the learned Special Judge (Forests), Shimla in Corruption Case No. 58-S/7 of 2003/96, whereby respondents J.S. Parihar, Daulat Ram Kashyap and Mohan Singh, who were charged with and tried for offences, under Sections 218, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and Sections 5 & 6 of the H.P. Prevention of Specific Corrupt Practices Act, 1983, have been acquitted. 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No. - 2 - 2. Case of the prosecution, in a nut-shell, is that respondent J.S. Parihar, while working as Executive Engineer, Daulat Ram as Junior Engineer and Mohan Singh, Head Draftsman, allotted the work for construction of Approach Road to Access Tunnel RD-210 to RD-375 meters Sub-head, cutting of road from RD-285 to RD-300 meters. for `98700/-, which was 91.26% above than the estimated cost of `51606/-. The final payment was released for `98280/- to the contractor. PW-5 Rama Nand, while investigating F.I.R. No. 25/90, noticed certain irregularities in the work of Jhakri Division. He has requested the superior officers for constituting a technical committee to look into the matter. Consequently, the H.P. State Electricity Board constituted a technical committee to detect the irregularities committed during the execution of work in Jhakri Division. The committee submitted its report Ex. PW-5/D, on the basis of which, ruka Ex.PW-5/A was sent. Thereafter, F.I.R. Ex.PA/1 was registered. The matter was investigated by the police thoroughly. The challan was put up after completing all the codal formalities. 3. Respondents were charged under Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Sections 420, 218, 468, 467, 471 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 5 & 6 of the H.P. Prevention of Specific Corrupt Practices Act, 1983. They pleaded not guilty. 4. The Prosecution, in order to prove its case, has examined as many as 9 witnesses. Respondents were also - 3 - examined under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Their stand was that of denial simplicitor. 5. Learned trial Court, after appreciating Ex. PW-5/D and after taking into consideration the statements of material witnesses, i.e., PW-7 Naveen Kumar and PW-8 K.R. Verma acquitted the respondents. Hence, this appeal. 6. Mr. J.S. Guleria, learned Assistant Advocate General has strenuously argued that the prosecution has proved its case. According to him, learned Special Judge (Forest) has not correctly appreciated the oral as well as documentary evidence. 7. Mr. Satyen Vaidya, Mr. Ajay Kochhar and Mr. M.S. Kanwar, learned counsel for the respondents have supported the judgment dated 15.03.2005, passed by the learned Special Judge (Forests), Shimla. 8. We have heard the learned counsel for the respondents and gone through the record meticulously. 9. The site was inspected by the members of the technical committee on 24.09.1990 in the presence of JE/AEE/Executive Engineer concerned. The material witnesses relied upon by the prosecution are PW-7 Naveen Kumar and PW- 8 K.R. Verma. 10. PW-7 Naveen Kumar visited the spot on 19.03.1991 and prepared the site plan Ex. PW-7/A. According to him, he has not taken the measurement at the site personally and the entries showing the height were incorporated at the instance of Shri V.L. Gupta. He has also stated that the site was having - 4 - over-hanging of rock and thereafter upto Power House Road loose soil. 11. PW-8 K.R. Verma was one of the members of the technical committee. In cross-examination, he has admitted that during 1990, damages were caused to various works in the area. According to him, the committee has not fixed the RDs independently. He did not remember whether any cross-sections were prepared at the time of execution of work. He has also stated that the height of a site can be destroyed with number of reasons, i.e., with the passage of time. He has categorically admitted that if the soil is loose, then with the passage of time, site would be disturbed. 12. PW-7 Naveen Kumar has stated that he cannot tell about the measurement mentioned in Ex. PW-7/A which is correct as per the spot or not. They had not ascertained the site independently. PW-8 K.R. Verma has admitted in cross- examination that during 1990, damages were caused to various works in the area. The committee has not fixed the RDs independently. He did not remember whether any cross-sections were prepared at the time of execution of work. He further stated that with the passage of time, the height of a site can be destroyed. He has categorically admitted that if the soil is loose, then with the passage of time, site would be disturbed. - 5 - 13. In view of the abovestated position, we see no reason to interfere with the judgment of acquittal passed by the trial Court. Hence, the appeal is dismissed. (Surjit Singh), Judge (Rajiv Sharma), Judge May 31, 2011. (bhupender) - 6 -