G V NANJUNDIAH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant, Shri G.V. NanJundiah,was tried by Shri 0.P. Singla, Special Judge, Delhi, for having committed an offence punishable under section 161, Indian Penal Code and sections 5(l)(d) and 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act on the allegation that be being a public servant as Executive Engineer, Central Public Works Department, Housing Division, Delhi Development Authority, New Delhi, on 30th October, 1973, at his house No. R-1/57, Greater Kailash, New Delhi, accepted a sum of Rs, 2.500.00 from one Shri R.S. Sharma, contractor as gratification other than legal remuneration as a motive or reward for releasing the security amount of the contract in the sum of rupees one lac and to approve and sanction for extra substituted work executed by the contractor for construction of doublestoreyed houses for Lower Income Group in D.I.S. Block at Kalkaji and being a public servant on the aforesaid date and place thus by corrupt or illegal means by otherwise abusing his position obtained for himself a pecuniary advantage of Rs. 2.500.00 . The Trial Court finding the appellant guifty of having committed the offence sentenced him to six months' simple imprisonment and a fine of Rs. l,000.00 by its order dated 26th October, 1977, under section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act (hereinafter called 'the Act'). The appellant was also sentenced to six months' simple imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 5000.00 under section 161 of the Indian Penal Code. Both the sentences were, however, ordered to run concurrently. In default of payment of fine, the appellant was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for two months. The sentence in default of payment of fine was ordered to run consecutively.

(2.) The appellant feeling aggrieved by his conviction and sentence has challenged the same in this appeal, both on facts and on question of law. It would be relevant here to note in brief the facts of the case. The prosecution story as unfolded by the contractor Shri R.S Sharma(PW 1) is as follows. Shri R.S. Sharma in the year 1972-73 was carrying, on the business of build- ing contract in the name of 'R.S. Sharma and Company' in partnership with his son and three other persons. In July, 1972, he got building contract for the construction of Lower Income Group Houses (Group No. 1) in Kalkaji Colony. In February, 1973, he got another contract for the construction of Lower Income Group Houses (Group No. 2). The number of houses which were to be constructed in respect of group No. 1 was 326. Further the additional items work in respect of these houses were also executed, and a sum of rupees two lacs was payble to them which amount was outstanding. The appellant, he stated, was the Executive Engineer in charge of the works. He further stated that of the previous bills pertaining to the work which had been executed by them, a sum of rupees one lac had been kept by the department as security. He asked the appellant on 3/4 occasions to release the security amount of rupees one lac by getting bank security as was done in the other divisions. He also asked the appellant to sanction the amount due on "' account of the extra work. He submitted a copy of the guarantee bond, Exhibit Public Witness .I/A with letter Exhibitt Public Witness .I/B and application Exhibit P.W.1/C personally to the appellant on 17th October, 1973. Thereafter he approached the appellant 3/4 times and repeated his requests for releasing the security amount and the amount in respect of extra work. On 30th October, 1973, he stated, he met the appellant at his office when his son, Shri U.S. Sharma (Public Witness 2) was with him on the way in the office building he met Shri Sehgal, Accounts Officer, working under the appellant. He also requested Shri Sehgal to help him in the release of the security amount. He then stated that he reiterated his request to the appellant for early payment, expressing his financial difficulties in carrying on with the execution of the Work. The appellant asked him if he could pay Rs. 5.000.00 . The witness represented that he had no money even to carry on with his work. Thereupon, the appellant is alleged to have asked him to bring Rs. 2,500.00 for payment to him at his house that evening and that on payment of that amount he would consider the matter. The appellant is further stated to have told him that he would have to pay further amount of Rs. 2500.00 after refund of the security amount and payment in respect of extra items. Telling the appellant that he will see him at his house in the evening and his son came out of his room. They came to the ground floor of the building and deliberated over the matter. They did not want to pay the bribe as they thought that in case they paid the bribe once their further work will not be done without payment of further bribe. They then thought of rushing to the bank to withdraw Rs. 2,500.00 and any further steps that were to be taken would be considered later as otherwise the bank would be closed. They then went to their bank, Syndicate Bank, G.B. Road and withdraw Rs. 2,500.00 from there account with the bank. He further stated that he asked the Manager to give the money in the form of Rs. 100.00 currency notes. He also asked the Manager of the Bank to issue certificate regarding payment by mentioning the number of the currency notes. The requisite certificate was issued by the Manager.

(3.) After withdrawing the amount they mutually decided to go to the 'Central Bureau of Investigation. They went there at 4 or 4.15 p.m. and met the Superintendent 'of Police. The witness presented complaint. Exhibit P.W.I/D, to the Superintendent of Police. The complaint, he stated, is in the hand of his partner Pothi Singh and bears his signatures at point 'A'.