STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR Vs. VINAY NANDA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted.

(2.) Corruption at any level, by any person, of any magnitude is condemnable which cannot be ignored by the judicial Courts, when proved. No leniency is required to be shown in proved cases under the Prevention of Corruption Act which itself treats the offences under it of a special nature to be treated differently than the general penal offences. The convicts of the offences under the Act are to be dealt with heavy hand and deterrent rod. No populous or sympathetic approach is needed in such cases. The only exception is the existence of special circumstances for awarding the minimum sentence.

(3.) The facts giving rise to the determination of the question noted hereinabove are that the respondent, when posted as cashier in the Procurement Department of the State of Jammu and Kashmir, tampered the record regarding the carriage of store articles to and fro through RTC vehicles. The word "RTC" was changed into "one RTC vehicles" and the words "BTC" was changed into the words "RTC". After withdrawing Government money for making payment to the carriers, the respondent was alleged to have misappropriated the amount with the connivance of his superior officers. It was specifically stated in the complaint filed against him that with the connivance of the Account Officer Shri Babu Ram Sharma the respondent encashed a cheque of Rs. 89,000/- from the Treasury and misappropriated the same. On receipt of the complaint against the respondent, a preliminary enquiry was conducted during which it transpired that accused had in fact misappropriated the amount upon which a regular FIR No. 23 of 1987 was registered and investigation commenced. During the investigation it was found that Cheque No. 0547185 for an amount of Rs. 97,952.11 was encashed by the respondent-accused but instead of remitting the amount into the Treasury, he misappropriated the same. To conceal the embezzlement he defalcated the account by making a false entry of remittance in cash book at page No. 41. The accused confessed the non remittance of the account and when show cause notice was issued to him on 1-3-1985, he refunded the said amount in different instalments during the years 1985-87. After completion of the investigation charge-sheet was filed in the Court of Special Judge, Anti Corruption, Jammu who charged him for the commission of offences under Section 5(2) of the Act and Sections 409 and 468 of the Ranbir Penal Code vide its order dated 1st May, 1991. The accused pleaded not guilty to the charge and claimed to be tried.