K.F. MATHAI Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) APPELLANT is the 1st accused in C.C. No. 5 of 1998 on the file of the Enquiry Commissioner and Special Judge, Thrissur. The appellant was charged with offences punishable under Section 5(1)(c) and (d) read with Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 (in short, "the Act of 1947") and Sections 409, 465, 471, 477A and 420 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (in short, "IPC"). After trial, the court below convicted the appellant for offences punishable under Sec. 5(1)(c) and (d) read with Sec. 5(2) of the Act of 1947 and with the aid of Sec. 13(1)(c) and (d) read with Secs. 13(2) and 30 of the Prevention of Corruption Act. 1988 (in short, "the Act of 1988"). Court below held that in view of the sentence under Sec. 5(1)(c) of the Act of 1947, no separate sentence need be awarded under Sec. 5(1)(d) of the said Act. Still further, the court below convicted the appellant under Secs. 409, 420 and 477A IPC. Appropriate sentences too were imposed on the appellant and it was directed that substantive sentences of imprisonment should run concurrently.

(2.) HEARD Shri R. Anil, learned counsel for the appellant and Shri N. Suresh, learned Public Prosecutor.

(3.) LEARNED trial Judge examined 16 witnesses on the side of the prosecution. There was no defence evidence. Exts.P1 to P27 are the documents produced on the side of the prosecution. Shri R. Anil, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the court below committed a grave legal error in convicting the appellant. According to him, the evidence in this case do not justify a conviction. Before dealing with the actual issues involved in the case, we shall just look into the evidence adduced by the prosecution against the appellant.