Partly allowed

Ashok Kumar Srivastava v. The State Of Bihar Through Vigilance, Patna

Patna HC17 Apr 2017CR. APP (SJ)/325/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Oral order where the Court, relying on Section 14(2) of the Special Court Act, modified the impugned order. The appellant was permitted to act on behalf of the trust pending appearance by other trustees, directing the lower court to dispose of confiscation proceedings within six months.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order was modified; notices accepted on behalf of all trustees; lower court directed to dispose of the case within six months.

Ashok Kumar Srivastava Vs The State Of Bihar… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Patna HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Appeal (SJ) No.325 of 2016

¶2

Arising Out of PS.Case No. -77 Year- 2009 Thana -C.B.I CASE District- PATNA

¶3

====================================================== 1. Ashok Kumar Srivastava S/o Late Ganga Prasad R/o Vill + P.O. - Mahisari, P.S. - Ujiarpur, Distt. - Samastipur. .... .... Appellant/s Versus

¶4

The State of Bihar through Vigilance, Patna. .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr. Hemant Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Ramakant Sharma(L.O.,I/C VIG.) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR TRIVEDI ORAL ORDER

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the appellant as well as learned senior counsel for the Vigilance.

¶6

14 17-04-2017

¶7

Learned senior counsel for the Vigilance concedes to the principle laid down by this Court at an earlier occasion relating to Kapil Muni Rai v. State of Bihar as reported in 2012 (1) PLJR 194 that in terms of Section 14(2) of the Special Court Act, other persons, apart from delinquent is to be noticed, in case, they are able to, prima facie, suggest their interest in the property under the lis. Furthermore, it has been submitted that so far this particular appeal is concerned, that has purposely been filed by the appellant in order to frustrate the purpose of the Special Court Act in order to cause delay in disposal of confiscation proceeding and to justify the same, it has been submitted that though it has been pleaded at the end of the appellant that a trust is there, particularly, appellant is one of the trustees and further identifying the wife and daughterin-law of delinquent in similar status, the other trustees, namely, Rajesh Kumar, Rajiv Ranjan, Indrachandra Prasad and Raju Kumar have not turned up waiting for their preparation by way of

¶8

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.325 of 2016 (14) dt.17-04-2017

¶9

¶10

initiating second, third, fourth and fifth round of litigation to defeat the aim of the Act.

¶11

Learned counsel for the appellant, though, has submitted that by a resolution, he has been authorized to contest on behalf of trust but fairly concedes that in case, an opportunity is given, all the trustees will be before the Court over which the learned senior counsel for the Vigilance submits that for that, let the learned lower court be directed simultaneously all the trustees to be co-operative in getting the confiscation proceeding disposed of within six months by way of their appearance and further to facilitate the same, notices be accepted on behalf of all the trustees including the appellant by the learned counsel representing Sanmati Devi Devi as well as Susma Devi (since dead) (substituted) whereupon learned counsel for the appellant concedes to.

¶12

Giving such liberty acknowledging on undertaking given by the learned counsel for the appellant, the order impugned is modified in terms thereof.

¶13

The learned lower court will dispose of the confiscation proceeding within six months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, without granting any undue adjournment to either of the parties.

¶14

(Aditya Kumar Trivedi, J)

¶15

perwez

¶16

U T

Ashok Kumar Srivastava v. The State Of Bihar Through Vigilance, Patna

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashok Kumar Srivastava v. The State Of Bihar Through Vigilance, Patna

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sudarshan Mahto and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar

Chandan Singh @ Chandan Kumar Singh and Anr. Vs The State Of Bihar

Sunil Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar

Harichandra Prasad @ Harischandra Prasad Vs The State Of Bihar

Mahendra Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Md. Naushad Alam and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar