M MUNISWAMY Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) the appellant was accused in c.c. no. 25 of 1984 before the special judge, metropolitan area, bangalore, and he has been convicted for the offence under section 420 read with section 471 (two counts), 420 read with section 511, ipc and also under section 5(1)(d) read with section 5(2) and 5(3-a) of the prevention of corruption act (for short 'the act') and sentenced to undergo r.i. for a period of two years in respect of each of these offences with a direction that the sentences shall run concurrently,

(2.) the case put forward by the prosecution in brief is as follows:accused muniswamy was working as head guard in the security department of hotel ashoka and during the period june and july 1982, he preferred three medical reimbursement bills in a sum of Rs. 524, Rs. 414.69 ps. And Rs. 2,076.55 ps. Enclosing the medical bills, on the assertion that be had purchased those medicines for treating his son raja and the bill preferred for a sum of Rs. 524/- was sanctioned only for a sum of Rs. 503.40 ps. And that amount was paid to the accused, before the other two bills were passed, it came to the notice of the concerned authorities of ashoka hotel that the son of this accused was not ailing and in fact one karunakaran the co-brother of the accused was ailing and he had been admitted to church of south India hospital and the accused had made it appear that that karunakaran was his son raja and whatever amounts were spent for treating that karunakaran, he wanted to get reimbursement from the management of ashoka hotel making it appear that they were purchased for treating his son raja. After the authorities of the ashoka hotel got suspicious about this aspect of the matter, the concerned went to csi hospital and verified lhat one karunakaran had been admitted as an in-patient and not raja the son of accused and thereafter, the two bills submitted for reimbursement for a sum of Rs. 414.69 ps. And Rs. 2,076.55 ps. Were not passed and the concerned authorities lodged a complaint and that was investigated which culminated in submission of the charge-sheet adverted to already.

(3.) after securing the presence of the accused, the learned special judge framedcharges under section 420, two charges under section 471 and under section 420 read with section 511 and section 5(1)(d) and 5(3-a) of the act. After the charges were read over and explained, accused pleaded not guilty to the charges levelled against him and the prosecution examined 16 witnesses in support of its case. To substantiate the charges levelled against the accused, the prosecution has examined the various workers of ashoka hotel including the security officer as p.ws. 3,5,6, 7,8,10,13 and 16, the relatives of the accused as p.ws. 1 and 11, the doctor of arcot who speaks about the treatment of karunakaran as p.w. 12, another doctor of kanchipuram who speaks about the treatment of karunakaran as p.w. 14, the photo studio owner to speak in respect of the photographs produced as p.w. 2, the head master of primary school at hindupur regarding admission of raja as p.w. 4, another head master as p.w. 9 and the investigating officer as p.w. 15.