P.N. SUKUMARAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The accused appellant has been convicted under Sec. 13(1)(c) and (d) read with Sec. 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as "the P.C. Act") by the learned trial Court. The said conviction has been affirmed by the High Court. Aggrieved, the appellant is in appeal challenging the aforesaid conviction. The sentence imposed i.e. four years rigorous imprisonment by the learned trial Court has, however, been reduced by the High Court to a period of two years rigorous imprisonment.

(2.) The gravamen of the charges levelled against the accused appellant is that as a public servant he had claimed to disburse wages to certain persons working in the Government Guest House at Mundakkayam including one Surendran, Parayil House, Mundakkayam. It is alleged that no such wages were actually disbursed and the amounts of such payments were misappropriated by the accused appellant along with two other persons. The prosecution to support its case had, inter alia, examined one Surendran son of Pappan as P.W.-7 who in his deposition clearly stated that he had not received any money from the accused appellant.

(3.) In a parallel proceeding instituted against one M. Gangadharan (Accused No.3, since acquitted), by way of Departmental proceedings, the aforesaid Gangadharan had examined one Surendran s/o Raghavan who admitted receipt of the wages. On the basis of the said testimony of Surendran s/o Raghavan the third accused in the criminal case i.e. M. Gangadharan was exonerated in the vigilance/Departmental proceedings. It was, therefore, contended on behalf of the appellant at the hearing before this Court held on 16th March, 2007 that this vital aspect of the matter was ignored by the learned trial Court. Taking into account the said submissions, this Court by its order dated 16th March, 2007 directed the prosecution to place before the learned trial Court the said materials. It was further directed that the learned trial court would record the evidence of Surendran s/o Raghavan and thereafter arrive at its finding on the above issue and send the same to this Court.