NARAYANANKUTTY U Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant was found guilty by the Enquiry Commissioner and Special Judge, Thrissur, in C.C. No. 22/01 on his file for offence under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act (for short, hereinafter referred to as 'PC' Act), and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for six months. Assailing the above conviction and sentence this appeal was preferred. PW10, the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau, Thrissur prosecuted the appellant alleging offences under Sections 7, 13(2) r/w 13(1) (d) and Section 15 r/w 13(1)(d) of the PC Act and also for offences under Sections 409, 419, 468, 471 and 109 IPC. It was alleged that the appellant was working as a Higher Grade Peon in Mullassery Block Panchayath Office during the period from 22.5.97 to 2.1.98 and in that capacity, he is a public servant coming under Section 2(c) of the PC Act. PW3 was a film operator in a Cinema Theater at Thrissur. In 1994, he subscribed a kuri run by Popular Kuries Limited of which PW2 was the Manager. The Kuri was prized in favour of PW3. Rs. 20,000/- was the kuri amount Rs. 5,000/- was handed over to PW3 in cash and the balance Rs. 15,000/- was invested in fixed deposit. To release that amount PW3 had to furnish sureties. While searching for sureties, PW4, a goldsmith informed PW3 that the appellant and PW5 had stood as sureties for a Kuri subscribed by PW4 for which the appellant had demanded and accepted Rs. 500/-. PW4 introduced the appellant to PW3. Appellant offered to issue salary certificate and arrange sureties for PW3. The appellant demanded Rs. 800/-. The appellant thereupon handed over Ext. P4 salary certificate in respect of PW5 and Ext. P5 salary certificate in respect of the appellant for which the appellant had demanded and accepted Rs. 800/- as gratification other than legal remuneration from PW3. PW3 produced Exts. P4 and P5 before PW2 and sought for releasing the money. Ext. P7 bond was executed by PW3 along with the appellant and other surety. While executing Ext. P7 bond, PW2 noticed that the signature of the other surety put in Ext. P7 does not tally with the specimen signature of the surety contained in Ext. P4. Therefore, PW3 was asked to produce another salary certificate with signature similar to that in Ext. P7 bond. PW3 approached the appellant. He then gave Ext. P6 salary certificate which was handed over to PW2. Having smelt rat, PW2 wrote Ext. P8 letter to PW6, the Secretary of Mullassery Block Panchayath to ascertain whether Ext. P4 to P6 were issued from the office. PW6 didn't respond. Therefore, PW2 made an enquiry over phone to which PW6, after verifying the records, informed that no such certificate was issued from that office.

(2.) PW7 subscribed a Kuri run by West Fort Kuries and Loans Pvt.Ltd, Thrissur. He also bid the kuri and was prized in his favour. To get the Kuri amount, he was asked to produce sureties. He approached the appellant through his friend one Thampi. The appellant offered to issue certificate and arrange sureties for which Rs. 3,000/- was demanded and obtained Rs. 1,500/- as advance. 3 salary certificates which were marked as Exts. P11 to P13 were issued. One in the name of the appellant, and another one in the name of PW5. PW8, the Manager of West Fort Kuries and Loans, on enquiry understood that Exts. P11 to P13 certificates were not issued by the Secretary of the Block Panchayath Office. The matter was reported to the vigilance and accordingly the case was registered. The investigation was taken over by PW10. A part of the investigation was conducted by PW9. PW10, after completing the investigation, filed the charge sheet against the appellant before the trial court alleging that the appellant had forged the salary certificates with intention to deceive and the forged documents were handed over to PW3 and 7 as if genuine documents and abetted PW3 and 7 to use the forged documents as genuine and to get the kuri bonds executed and to release the kuri amount and that the appellant had demanded and accepted illegal gratification and that he had got undue pecuniary advantage by abusing the office and there by committed the earlier mentioned offences.

(3.) The learned Special Judge took cognizance and issued process responding to which the appellant entered appearance. Copies of the final report and connected documents were furnished to the appellant. After hearing either side, having satisfied that there are materials to send the appellant for trial, charge for the said offences was framed. When read over and explained, the appellant pleaded not guilty. Hence, he was sent for trial. On the side of the prosecution, PWs. 1 to 10 were examined and Exts. Pl to P25 were marked. During the course of the cross examination of PWs.4, 5 and 7, certain portions of CD statements were marked as Exts. D1, D2, D3 and D3(a). After closing the evidence for the prosecution, the appellant was questioned under Section 313 1(b) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The appellant denied the incriminating evidence. He further stated that he didn't issue/give any certificate to any person and that without finding out the real culprit, he was falsely implicated. No defence evidence was let in. On appraisal of the evidence, the learned Special Judge arrived at a finding that the prosecution had not succeeded to establish that the appellant had forged the salary certificates or that it was used as genuine by him or that he had committed any forgery or abetment or that he had personated for the purpose of cheating. It was also found that the prosecution had not succeeded to establish that Exts. P11 to P13 were given by the appellant to PW7 or that he had received any gratification other than legal remuneration for issuing Exts. Pl 1 to P13. On the same time, it was found that Exts. P4, P5 and P6 were issued to PW3 by the appellant for which the appellant had demanded and accepted a sum of Rs. 800/- as gratification other than legal remuneration. Therefore, an offence under Section 7 of the PC Act was established. Consequently, the appellant was convicted and sentenced as above.