G MOHAN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the parties.

(2.) The appellant was convicted by the trial court under Section 5 (1) (d) read with Section 5 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 and Section 165 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs 600, in default to suffer further simple imprisonment for three months on each count. On appeal being preferred, the High Court confirmed the conviction. Hence, this appeal by special leave.

(3.) Having heard the parties and perused the impugned judgment, we are of the view that after meticulously examining the oral and documentary evidence adduced by the parties, the claim of the appellant that refrigerator was purchased by mother of the appellant by paying price thereof, has been disbelieved and prosecution case, that for purchase of refrigerator entire price was paid in the month of October 1983, by the person in whose favour the refund order was passed by the appellant in his official capacity one month thereafter i. e. in the month of November 1983, has been accepted. It is true that the present case is not a case of direct evidence, but it is a case of circumstantial evidence and on the basis of circumstantial evidence the courts have come to the conclusion that the payment of price was made by the person in whose favour refund order was passed and the price was paid for no other purpose except by way of illegal gratification to the appellant in kind.