New Delhi [India], November 1 : A Delhi court has discharged CDSCO official Dr. S Eswara Reddy and three other accused in a CBI corruption case, holding that the material placed on record did not make out a prima facie case to proceed against them.
Special Judge (PC Act) Vishal Pahuja of the Rouse Avenue Courts discharged Dr. Eswara Reddy, Animesh Kumar, Guljit Sethi alias Guljit Chaudhri and Praveen Kumar Lakshminarayana alias L. Praveen Kumar.
In a detailed order pronounced on October 31, the court said the allegations made by the CBI did not give rise to suspicion, “leave alone the grave suspicion”, required to proceed with a criminal trial.
The court held that there was insufficient material to prima facie establish the alleged criminal conspiracy among the accused or the offences invoked in the charge sheet.
While dealing with the allegations against Dr. Eswara Reddy, the court found that the prosecution material did not prima facie establish the essential allegations concerning demand and acceptance of an undue advantage.
The court also examined the circumstances relating to the alleged recovery of money and held that the material on record was insufficient to establish the allegations against him.
The court further found that the prosecution had not placed sufficient material to show that the public servants had performed their official duties improperly or dishonestly in return for an undue advantage.
On the allegations concerning the processing of applications and alleged changes in the recommendations of the Subject Expert Committee, the court found that the material on record did not prima facie establish any illegality.
The court also held that the intercepted call recordings relied upon by the prosecution could not be considered as evidence due to violations of the provisions of the Indian Telegraph Act and its rules. It further found that the remaining material was insufficient to establish the alleged criminal conspiracy.
Regarding Animesh Kumar, the court noted that the charge sheet did not specify the date, time or place of the alleged payment of Rs 30,000. It found no substantial material to prima facie establish the allegation against him.
As regards the other two accused, Guljit Sethi and Praveen Kumar, the court held that the prosecution material was insufficient to frame charges against them. It noted that the evidence relied upon by the prosecution did not prima facie establish the alleged criminal conspiracy.
Observing that mere suspicion was not sufficient to put an accused to trial and that the material must give rise to grave suspicion, the court concluded that the prosecution had failed to establish a prima facie case against any of the four accused.
Accordingly, the court discharged all four accused under Section 250 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, corresponding to Section 227 of the erstwhile Code of Criminal Procedure.