ABHAY KUMAR DAS V. UNION OF INDIA THROUGH CBI DHANBAD

Cr.Rev./192/2018

AI Insights

The case involves Abhay Kumar Das, a former Income Tax Officer, who was accused of entering into a criminal conspiracy with co-accused Barun Kumar Sinha, a Senior Tax Assistant, to fraudulently validate tax refund cheques from 2004-05 to 2007-08. The petitioner challenged the dismissal of his discharge application by the Special Judge, C.B.I., Dhanbad. The court examined whether the materials presented reasonably connected the petitioner to the alleged crime and whether the lower court had erred in its decision. The High Court upheld the lower court's decision, finding sufficient prima facie evidence against the petitioner.

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 725478 (HC-JHARKHAND)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 19-02-2019
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: Asian Resurfacing of Road Agency Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation
• Laws Referred To: Asian Resurfacing of Road Agency Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: RAJIV PRASAD
• Assessee Lawyers: RAJESH KUMAR; AMIT KUMAR; MANINDRA SINHA
• Keywords: Criminal conspiracy; Discharge application; Income Tax Officer; Refund voucher
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

"IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Revision No.192 of 2018 ------ Abhay Kumar Das aged about 60 years, son of Late Bhawesh Mohan Das, Resident of House No.14, Gautam Budha Path, New River View Colony, Anil Sur Path, Ulian, P.O. & P.S. Kadma, Jamshedpur 831005, District East Singhbhum, Jharkhand .... .... …. Petitioner Versus Union of India through CBI, Dhanbad .... .... .... Opp. Party ------ CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.B. MANGALMURTI For the Petitioner : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate Mr. Amit Kumar, Advocate Mr. Manindra Kumar Sinha, Advocate For the C.B.I : Mr. Rajiv Nandan Prasad, Advocate 05/19.02.2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the C.B.I. 2. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that order dated 20th January, 2018 passed by Special Judge, C.B.I., Dhanbad is under challenge by which the application for discharge of the petitioner was dismissed. It is further submitted that as per allegation the petitioner while working as Income Tax Officer of Ward No.3(4), Bokaro Steel City, Bokaro, entered into a criminal conspiracy with co-accused persons including Barun Kumar Sinha, Senior Tax Assistant in the same ward of Bokaro during the period January, 2010 to April, 2010 in several cases where the cheque of refund amount from Income Tax were dishonestly validated in the different name of persons. These cheques were related to the period 2004-05 to 2007-08. It is also submitted that this petitioner was in no way associated with all these criminal conspiracy but has discharged his function in his official capacity. He also submitted that in reply to the letter of Joint Commissioner, Income Tax, Range-3, Bokaro dated 14th May, 2010, this petitioner had replied to the explanation sought from him and the same was submitted through letter dated 31st May, 2010 where it has been stated that adequate caution was taken by him and he always verified the amount in the new voucher with reference to the surrendered voucher. On the order sheet, the names of assessees were taken care of. It was the mistake committed by co-accused Barun Kumar Sinha, Senior Tax Assistant. He had reported against him for his fraudulent acts for necessary action. After submission of explanation of this petitioner, a departmental proceeding was initiated against erring Senior Tax Assistant by order dated 18th August, 2010 of the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-3, Bokaro. These materials were not considered by the court below while considering his discharge application. 3. Learned counsel for the C.B.I. submitted that this petitioner along with co-accused persons entered into a criminal conspiracy by making interpolation in the refund voucher. He further submitted that at the time of consideration of the discharge application, the court below is not required to examine voluminous material which may fall in the nature of mini trial. The court below is only to see whether material on record reasonably connects the accused with the crime. These proposition was held in the case of Asian Resurfacing of Road Agency Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation reported in 2018 (2) JLJR 320 (SC). 4. Replying to the above contention, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that Hon’ble Supreme Court has held in several judgments that the court below must indicate in its order about the material collected against the accused persons which are sufficient to prosecute him. 5. Considering the above submission of parties and on perusal of papers attached with this application, it appears that the court below while considering the application for discharge on behalf of this petitioner, has mentioned the material collected against him while he was serving as Income Tax Officer of Ward No.3(4), Bokaro Steel City and at the relevant time he was in criminal conspiracy with other co-accused persons indulged in the refund of tax amount fraudulently causing loss to Income Tax Department. The court below has passed reasoned order and found prima facie case against this petitioner and rejected the discharge application of this petitioner. 6. Finding no illegality or irregularity in the impugned order, instant application is dismissed. 7. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the court concerned. (B.B. Mangalmurti, J.) Anit "