Darshan Singh vs State of Punjab

M. Jeyapaul, J.—Appellant Darshan Singh has filed Crl. A. No. 226-SB of 2007, appellant Inderjit Singh has filed Crl. A. No. 250-SB of 2007 and appellant Avtar Singh has filed Crl. A. No. 298-SB of 2007, challenging the conviction and sentence u/s 120-B/467/468/471/477 IPC and Section 13(1)(c) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Accused Ramesh Kumar died during the pendency of the trial and accused Nanak Chand Rana was discharged by this High Court vide order dated 9.2.2006. The brief case of the prosecution is that on 19.10.1995, DSP Raghbir Singh accompanied by other police officials visited Punjab Warehousing Corporation godown at Khanian road, Amloh. Darshan Singh, Manager and Inderjit Singh, Accounts Clerk of the said Warehousing Corporation were present. DSP Raghbir Singh checked the stock register and other records. As per the records, wheat was stored in Sat Kartar Rice Mill and Siri Gobind Rice Mill, Amloh. On checking the bags of wheat, it was found that some of the bags were missing. Darshan Singh, Manager informed DSP that stock had been shifted to godown No. 7 of Warehousing Corporation due to rainy season. Some bags had been destroyed on account of rain. On checking, 16,999 bags of wheat were found missing. As per record, there should have been 22,700 bags of wheat. On the basis of the report prepared by DSP Raghbir Singh to the effect that the accused might have embezzled to the tune of Rs. 66-67 lacs, the present case was registered. After completion of the investigation, the present accused were challaned.

On the side of the prosecution, as many as 16 witnesses were examined. Accused Avtar Singh and Darshan Singh in their statements u/s 313 Cr.P.C. contended that there were no rules framed by the Food Corporation of India (for short ''FCI'') as to how the wheat should be stored. In fact, the wheat bags were stored in open godown taken on rent. Due to heavy rains wheat bags were shifted to a safer place. Though the wheat bags were lying at safer place, the Vigilance Department without visiting the said place falsely implicated them. Accused Inderjit Singh in his statement u/s 313 Cr.P.C. has submitted that as his duty was only to maintain account books, registers and other records at warehouse, the stock of wheat was not in his physical control nor was it in his custody. He was not responsible for the wheat stock lying in the open godown. He also endorsed the other pleas taken by co-accused Avtar Singh and Darshan Singh.

On the side of the defence, 5 witnesses were examined to substantiate the plea set up by the accused.

Learned counsel appearing for the appellants would submit that shortage of wheat stock was not at all established by the prosecution. The fact that some of the wheat bags were destroyed due to rains, even as per the admission of the witnesses examined on the side of the prosecution, was not at all considered by the trial Court. A Committee was constituted in the aftermath of the havoc rendered by flood. Shifting of the bags as per the directions of the Committee Members and the disposal of the same by the Warehousing Corporation as admitted by the witnesses on the side of the prosecution were not at all appreciated by the trial Court. To top it all, the witnesses on the side of the prosecution have admitted that there was no loss to the Corporation nor was any gain for the accused. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants referring to the evidence of the prosecution witnesses as well as the defence witnesses in the background of Exhibits D-1 to D-5 would submit that the prosecution miserably failed to establish its case.

Per Contra, learned Dag, Punjab would submit that the evidence of PW 1 would go to show that stocks were not shifted due to rain as contended by the accused. PW 2 Bawa Singh has cogently spoken to the shortage of wheat stock at the time of inspection. The above evidence was amply supported by the police officials, accompanied by DSP Raghbir Singh at the time of inspection. The trial Court has rightly evaluated the evidence and come to a conclusion that wheat bags were missing from the Warehousing Corporation godown.

Of course, PW 1 was the driver of truck No. Pat-8821, he would depose that he did not carry any wheat bag from Sat Kartar Rice Mill, Amloh to Rajdhani Flour Mill, Amloh between 9.9.1995 to 26.9.1995. He also did not sign on any gate pass during those days.

PW 2 Bawa Singh who was the Manager of Punjab State Warehousing Corporation, Amloh having brought the summoned records spoke about the shortage of wheat bags at the time of inspection. But during the course of cross examination, PW 2 Bawa Singh has stated that in the instant case after issuance of release order by FCI, wheat was sold and the price was deposited by the purchasers with the FCI. The whole of the price of the wheat in the instant case had been deposited by the purchasers with the FCI. As per the records, no loss had been caused to FCI.

The above evidence of PW 2 completely eclipses his testimony in-chief supporting the case of the prosecution.

PW 3 Ramesh Chander Kansal was the Assistant Manager of Punjab Warehousing Corporation Depot at Amloh during the relevant period. He has also deposed that the whole of the price of the wheat had been deposited with the FCI and no loss had been caused in this case to the FCI. There was no wrongful gain for the accused nor was any wrongful loss to the FCI. The evidence of PW 3 completely corroborates the above testimony of PW 2.

PW 5 Balwant Singh, Inspector, Food and Supply, Amloh during the relevant period joined DSP Raghbir Singh, Vigilance Bureau, Fatehgarh Sahib at the time when the inspection was done. Though he has spoken about the missing of wheat bags in the godown premises at Amloh, he has categorically admitted that he had not physically verified the missing of bags. He had also admitted the fact that there was rainfall in the last month of August and in the beginning of September, 1995.

PW 11 who also joined DSP Raghbir Singh at the time of inspection has stated that he did not count the bags in the godown personally though he was present at the godown. The godowns were open godowns as per his admission. He had also not inspected the stock register personally. Under such circumstances, the competency of PW 5 and PW 11 who spoke about the missing of wheat bags looms large. It is to be noted that DSP Raghbir Singh had unfortunately passed away even before he was examined before the trial Court.

PW 12 Narender Kaushal who was DSP, Patiala would candidly admit that he had not recorded the statement of any Department officials of the FCI to verify the fact whether the FCI had suffered any losses or the accused had received any gain. His deposition is that FCI had written a letter that there was no shortage and the shortage of FCI, if any, was made good by the accused.

The above evidence on record does not establish the case of the prosecution beyond reasonable doubt. Rather, the above evidence supports the defence set up by the accused.

Now let me take up the defence evidence let-in by the accused. Normally, the witnesses interested in the acquittal of the accused would be brought by the accused as defence witnesses. Therefore, the evidence of the defence witnesses will have to be approached cautiously by the Court of Law. But in the instant case, the very officials of the FCI have been examined on the side of the defence. Their testimony was backed by the documents maintained by them in the regular course of business. Therefore, the evidence let-in by defence in the peculiar circumstances of this case cannot be simply discarded.

DW 1 Subhash Chander, Technical Assistant, State Warehousing Corporation, Amloh had brought the records from the office and deposed that during the relevant period the wheat stocks were stored in the open katcha place. On 3/4.9.1995, there was a heavy rain causing flood in the rice mill. Two layers of wheat bags from the bottom were totally damaged due to heavy rains. The photographs taken by the Department for the purpose of despatching to the senior officers were marked as Mark D-1 which contained 11 photographs. The above photographs disclosed that there had been a flood in the godown taken on rent by the Warehousing Corporation and as a result of which there had been a damage of wheat bags.

DW 1 Subhash Chander has further deposed based on the original records he brought to the Court that Jagjit Singh, Sr. Technical Officer, Warehousing Corporation visited the depot on 18.9.1995, in the aftermath of the flood in the depot and directed the staff of Warehousing Corporation of Amloh to shift the wheat bags from Sat Kartar Rice Mill to a safer place within 3 days vide order dated 18.9.1995 passed by him. The original record brought by him was marked as Ex. D2. On 24.9.1995, Sh. N.C. Rana, District Manager, Patiala also visited the spot. He was pleased to form a Committee wherein Sh. J.K. Dhir was one of the Members of the Committee. The Committee was directed by Sh. N.C. Rana to segregate the stocks and shift the stocks to a safer place as per his order passed on 24.9.1995. The above order passed by Sh. N.C. Rana on 24.9.1995 was marked as Ex. D3. On 6.10.1995, Sh. Gurbachan Singh, Manager (Quality Control), Warehousing Corporation, Chandigarh also visited Sat Kartar Rice Mill and recorded the fact that during the period between 10.9.1995 and 27.9.1995, the stocks had been shifted to a safer place. Further, an order was passed to dispose of the damaged wheat at the level of the Head Office itself. The above proceedings passed on 6.10.1995 were marked as Ex. D4. Sh. O.P. Tomar, Chief Manager (Quality Control), Head Office, Chandigarh also visited on 15.9.1995. He having inspected the entire wheat stock which was affected by flood prepared his report marked as Ex. DA. DW 1 has further deposed that the Department had disposed of the entire 22,700 wheat bags as per rules. Based on the records brought by him to the Court during the course of trial, DW 1 has further deposed that the release orders were issued by the FCI after physical verification of the presence of the stock at the spot. The FCI issued release order after the amount deposited by the purchasers. The whole of the amount had gone to the accounts of the FCI. The Department had not suffered any loss of wheat in this case. The above evidence of DW 1 which was not put to effective challenge by the prosecution completely cuts the very root of the foundation laid by the prosecution.

Let me now take up the evidence of DW 2 Gurbachan Singh, Deputy Manager (Quality Control), Punjab State Warehousing Corporation, Head Office, Chandigarh. He was one of the Committee Members constituted as per the orders dated 20.9.1995 for checking and shifting the wheat stock stored in the godown of the Corporation at Amloh due to flood. On inspection, he found that two layers of wheat bags from bottom were damaged due to heavy rains and flood from 30.8.1995 to 3/4.9.1995. He deposed that he made a noting that flood affected stock might be disposed of at the level of the Head Office, Chandigarh. The report submitted by him was marked as Ex. D5 and D6.

I find that the prosecution has virtually not challenged the testimony of DW 2. The evidence of DW 2 completely corroborates the evidence of DW 1.

DW 3 N.C. Rana, District Manager, Warehousing Corporation, Patiala deposed that 22,700 bags of wheat were stored on behalf of FCI in the Warehousing Corporation godown, Amloh in an open katcha plinth. In the month of September, 1995 there was heavy rain at Amloh. 2-3 layers of wheat stock were badly damaged due to heavy rains and flood. He directed the staff to shift the whole stock to a safer place after proper segregation. He formed a Committee for the purpose of proper segregation of wheat stock. Accordingly, the whole of wheat stock was shifted to a safer place by the staff concerned under the supervision of the Committee. He shouldered the responsibility of issuing instructions to shift the wheat stock to a safer place. The notings made by him were marked as Ex. D7 and D8.

His testimony was attacked on the ground that he figured as one of the accused. But later on he was discharged by the High Court. Inasmuch as his testimony lends corroboration to the other testimony on record, I find no reason to reject his evidence.

DW 4 J.K. Dhir, Manager, Punjab State Warehousing Corporation, Patiala has stated that there were 22,700 bags stored in the Warehousing Corporation godown at Amloh. In the month of September, 1995 wheat bags were badly damaged due to flood in the warehousing godown, Amloh. A Committee was formed by the District Manager, Patiala. He was also one of the Members of the Committee. As wheat stocks had been completely damaged due to flood, wheat bags were shifted to a safer place. He further deposed that later on whole of the wheat stock of 22,700 bags were released according to the order of FCI and the money also was deposited by the purchasers with FCI accordingly. He reiterates that there was no loss caused to FCI.

The evidence of DW 4 could not be demolished by the prosecution. DW 4 has supported the other evidence on record. I find no reason to reject the evidence of DW 4.

The above evidence on record would clinchingly establish that there was heavy flood on account of rain during the relevant period. The open katcha storage compound was completely flooded on account of which 2-3 layers of wheat bags were completely damaged. A Committee was formed to shift the stocks after segregation to a safer place. The entire stock had been disposed of by FCI by issuing release order after receiving the amount from the purchasers. It is the consistent testimony of the witnesses that there was no loss to the Warehousing Corporation nor was any unlawful gain to the accused.

In view thereof, I find that the prosecution miserably failed to establish the charges framed as against the accused. Therefore, the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the trial Court as against these accused-appellants is set aside and the appellants are acquitted of the charges framed against them. Accordingly, Crl. A. No. 226-SB of 2007 filed by appellant Darshan Singh, Crl. A. No. 250-SB of 2007 filed by appellant Inderjit Singh and Crl. A. No. 298-SB of 2007 filed by appellant Avtar Singh are allowed. The bail bonds executed by the appellants shall stand discharged.