In Brief
In the Bihar Fodder Scam cases, the Supreme Court clarified the distinction between a general conspiracy and distinct substantive offences of defalcation from different treasuries. Although a single conspiracy may span years and involve multiple treasuries, each defalcation from a particular treasury in a specific financial year constitutes a separate offence with distinct ingredients. The Court held that separate trials do not violate Article 20(2) (double jeopardy) since the substantive offences differ by treasury, amount, documents, and persons involved. Conviction for one treasury does not bar prosecution for another. The Court criticized the High Court's inconsistent orders, set aside the judgments quashing prosecutions, condoned delays in filing appeals, and directed expedited trial completion within nine months.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.