V.M. ABDUL AZEEZ Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) APPELLANT is the accused in C.C. No. 11 of 1998 on the file of the Court of Enquiry Commissioner and Special Judge, Kozhikode. He was found guilty under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (in short, the Act"). The conviction and sentence imposed by the court below is challenged in this appeal. Prosecution case, in brief, is that the accused, a Sub Engineer in the Kerala State Electricity Board (in short, "KSEB") while working in the Electrical Section, Mukkom, abused his position as a public servant, by corrupt and illegal means and obtained illegal gratification of Rs. 500/ - from PW1 as a motive or reward for recommending the issue of power allocation certificate for an industry proposed to be started by him. Later, he obtained another sum of Rs. 2,000/ - on 06.11.1996 for the same purpose. The case arose out of a trap laid by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vigilance and Anti Corruption Bureau, Kozhikode (in short, "Dy. SP., VACB"). The court below examined 16 witnesses and marked 21 documents on the side of the prosecution. Two witnesses were examined and seven documents were marked on the side of the defence. MOs 1 to 5 are the material objects.

(2.) HEARD Shri. V.G. Arun, the learned counsel for the appellant and Ms. Madhu Ben, the learned Public Prosecutor.

(3.) THE case revealed through evidence of witnesses is thus: PW1 had applied to the Kerala Financial Corporation (in short, "KFC") for a loan for Rs. 18,00,000/ - in order to start a furniture manufacturing unit. He had purchased 84.5 cents of land at a place called Odatheruvu for establishing the unit. Even before entertaining the loan application, the KFC directed PW1 to produce a power allocation certificate from KSEB showing that power was available for working the proposed furniture manufacturing unit. Accordingly PW1 submitted Ext. P1 application for the issue of power allocation certificate. It is the case of PW1 that Ext. P1 application was forwarded to the accused, the Sub Engineer, entrusting him with the duty to inspect the property of PW1 and to report the feasibility of granting power allocation certificate to the proposed unit. The application dated 04.10.1996 was received in the office of the Assistant Engineer on 05.10.1996. On the same day, it was handed over to the accused. It is the case of PW1 that on the very same day he took the accused in his own car to facilitate an inspection. There was a transformer close to the property of PW1. But, it was over loaded and no power could be drawn from the same to the proposed unit. Another transformer had been installed 250 meters away from the property of PW1. The accused told PW1 that he could see whether power could be given to PW1 from the said transformer. It is the case of PW1 that on their way back to office, the accused told him from the car that he was the person to say if power was available or not. It was also informed by the accused that if PW1 had met him properly, he would make everything fine. Responding to this gesture of the accused, PW1 gave Rs. 500/ - to the accused and he accepted the same. At that time, PW5 was also present in the car.