T. K. SATHEESHKUMAR Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The 4th and the 2nd accused in CC No.39/2005 of the Enquiry Commissioner and the Special Judge Kozhikode for offences punishable under sections 13(1)(c) & 13(1)(d) read with section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act 1988 and under sections 201,409 420,465 , 468 and 471 read with section 34, IPC are the appellants herein.

(2.) The crux of the prosecution allegation was that the first accused was the district labour officer of Wayanad. The second accused was the UD clerk in that office, the third accused the junior superintendent and the fourth accused, the LD clerk of the above office.Certain employees of one Makkimala estate alleging that they were not paid the arrears of gratuity due to them, approached the labour court and obtained orders in their favour. Pursuant to the orders, revenue recovery proceedings were initiated against the employer. A sum of Rs.2,51,749/- was remitted by the employer in the taluk office, Mananthavady, towards partial discharge of the above liability. A sum of Rs.1,35,933/- was remitted on 7/3/2001 and the remaining sum of 1,16,320/- was remitted on 13/3/2001 totaling to the said amount of Rs.2,51,749/-. Thereafter, a demand draft for the above sum after deducting the DD commission was sent to the District Labour Office, Wayanad. The amount was encashed and was kept in the account of the DLO office. Thereafter, it was withdrawn by self drawn cheques. According to the prosecution, the amounts were released to various beneficiaries during March 2002. A total sum of Rs.70,323- was not disbursed and was allegedly not brought on account. It was not deposited in the cash box also till 22/1/2003. Thereafter, the first and the second accused allegedly created forged receipts to make it appear that the balance amounts were paid to the beneficiaries. The above receipts were kept in the registers pursuant to the complaint of misappropriation. when enquiry started 4th accused , who was the LD clerk, caused disappearance of cash receipt from the file, to save co-accused. Crime was registered, investigation was conducted and after the completion of the investigation, final report was laid alleging commission of offences by the above four accused. Pending the proceedings, accused Nos. 1 and 3 died and the charge against them abated. Accused Nos. 2 and 4 faced the trial. On the side of the prosecutions, PW1 to PW38 were examined and Exts.P1 to P63 were marked. There was no defence evidence, Ultimately on the basis of the evidence tendered, the court below found that the amount was misappropriated temporarily by accused Nos. 1 to 3 and the 4th accused had caused the disappearance of the forged receipts to screen accused Nos. 1 to 3. The second accused was found guilty for offences punishable under section 13(1)( c) and 13 (1) (d) read with section 13 (2) of PC Act, convicted and sentenced to undergo RI for one year and to Pay 10,000/- as fine. In default, to undergo one month for each of the offence found against the accused. The 4 th accused was found guilty of offences punishable under section 201 IPC, convicted and sentenced to undergo six months imprisonment and a fine of Rs.10,000/- with a default sentence. Aggrieved by the above sentence, the accused have preferred this appeal.

(3.) Heard the learned senior counsel for the 4th accused and the learned counsel for the 2nd accused and the learned Special Government Pleader for the Vigilance. Examined the records.