HARISHCHANDRA KRISHNA GADKAR Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) The appellant Harishchandra Krishna Gadkar (original accused 3) was tried along with three others for offences punishable under Section 120-B read with Sections 409, 407 (sic 467) , 471, 477-A, 218 Indian Penal Code and under Section 5 (2) read with Sections 5 (l) (c) and 5 (l) (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947. The trial court acquitted A-l and A-4 and convicted A-2 (P. B. Dalvi) and the appellant. They preferred an appeal to the High Court. The High Court acquitted A-2 and confirmed the convictions of the appellant. Hence, the present appeal.

(3.) The prosecution case is as follows. Accused 1 worked as Assistant Superintendent of stamps in the year 1969 and he was the Head of the Department of the Stamp office. As the Head, he was the Collector under the Bombay Stamps Act and indian Stamps Act and also under the Bombay Court Fees Act. He retired on 7-9-1971. His duty was to look after the general administration of the Stamp office. Accused 2 worked as Deputy Assistant Superintendent of Stamps, in-charge of Stores, accounts and Sales. He was suspended from service w. e. f. 1-7-1971 and he retired from service on 24-1-1974. Accused 3-the appellant herein was the stores Supervisor in the Stamp Office in 1969 and he was helping accused 2 in respect of Stores branch. He was suspended from service on 21-5-1971. Accused 4 was the Sales Supervisor and he was suspended from service on 18-8-1974. Public Witness 1 gave evidence on behalf of the prosecution in the capacity as superintendent of Stamps. In 1969, he was working as the Deputy Assistant Superintendent He had given the details of the procedure. According to his evidence stamps were received in wooden boxes from the Collector of Stamps, Nasik Road. Deputy assistant Superintendent of Stores-accused 2 with the help of his assistants used to bring the wooden stamp cases. He had to examine the cases of stamps in order to ascertain whether there was any pilferage. As and when accommodation in the wooden and iron bins became available he had to break open the boxes, compare the contents and enter the quantity in the registers. Accused 3 was in-charge of the Stores branch in 1969. There were two keys for double lock one key used to remain with accused 2 and the second key used to remain with accused 3. When the boxes were opened they used to be opened in the presence of A-2, who was a gazetted officer and A-3 used to take out the stamps, according to the evidence. In addition to the double lock registers, there was a single lock register. Whatever stocks which were to be issued to the Stamp vendors were not issued directly from the double lock. They used to be taken in the single lock and then they used to be issued to the Stamp Vendors. If the stock was found insufficient, the Stamp Vendor had to submit an emergent indent and in that case accused 3 used to issue stamps to the vendors after obtaining the sanction of accused 2.