MANGAT RAM Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) After having maintained the conviction of the appellant Mangat Ram in Criminal Appeal No. 132 of 1975 vide and Judgment passed on 26th March, 1982 in Criminal Appeal No. 129 of 1975, I had considered it appropriate to hear the learned counsel for the parties on the question of sentence.

(2.) Mr. D.R. Sethi, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. Z. A. Khalidi, learned counsel for the State in their usual forth right manner, have placed before me the rival contentions. Mr. Sethi's submission is that there are special reasons in this case fur not sending the appellant to jail. Mr. Khalidi contested this proposition. He says that the appellant deserves no leniency and as such the sentence awarded to him by the Special Judge be maintained.

(3.) Under Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act the minimum sentence prescribed Kis rigorous imprisonment foone year; the imposition of fine is also mandatory. However, to award lesser sentence than the minimum prescribed to a convict special reasons are required to be given in writing. It is axiomatic that special reasons must arise out of the facts of each case and not be common to all cases of this nature.