HARSHADRAI PRANJIVAN MEHTA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appellant has preferred this appeal under Sec. 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 26.5.1999 passed by the learned Special Judge, Mehsana, in Special Case (ACB) No. 15/1992, whereby, the learned Judge has convicted the appellant under Sec. 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act and sentenced to undergo R/I for 2 1/2 years and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/ - in default, to undergo further R/I for six months. The appellant is also convicted under Sec.13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and sentenced to undergo R/I for a period of 3 1/2 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 14000/ -, in default, to undergo further R/I for eight months, which is impugned in this appeal.

(2.) The brief facts of the prosecution case is as under : -

(3.) The appellant -accused was elected member of Nagarpalika since 1988 and he was declared elected vide Ex. 52 by the Collector. The accused was also discharging his duties as the Chairman of Town Planning Committee. One Purshottambhai C. Patel - PW -2 Ex. 25, who is the head of Town Planning Office used to prepare plans/map of Town Planning and Development of Mehsana city and Banaskantha district. The plans of Mehsana town were prepared and they were under implementation and after every 10 years such plans are to be revised. The revised plans were also prepared and the scheme drawn by Purshottambhai was handed over to the Nagarpalika by addressing a letter to the President of Nagarpalika advising the President to follow the necessary procedure as per Sec. 9 of the Act by sending a copy to the Government, and as per Sec. 13 by showing the notification and calling for the objections within two months and thereafter to finalise the proposal. As advised by Purshottmabhai Patel, the objections were called for. After the objections were received, the committee meeting was held, headed by the appellant -accused being the Chairman. All the committee members thought over the objections and after giving sufficient opportunity to the affected persons and after hearing and considering their representations and objections, rejected the objections. Necessary resolutions were passed vide ex. 74 dated 3.2.1989 by the Town Planning Committee. So far as the procedure is concerned, the Town Planning Committee (TPC) had accepted almost all proposals/opinions of the town planning officer and they were in agreement. The final Authority to take final decision on development plan is the General Body of Nagarpalika. The decision of the TPC is not the final decision, more or less no individual member is authorised to take the final decision. Therefore, the final Authority is the General Body of the Nagarpalika and not the TPC. On 22.6.1989 vide Resolution No. 22, Ex. 77, the TPC got extension to submit plans to the Government from 30.6.1989 to 31.12.1989. The resolution was passed as per Sec. 9(1) of the Town Planning Act, vide Ex. 50 on 27.12.1990. The same was published in the Government Gazette Ex. 47 on page -667, calling for the objections. On 19.2.1991, the owners of survey No. 1685 and 1686 gave their objections vide Ex. 66 to the President of Mehsana Nagarpalika. The same is mentioned in the objection register vide Ex. 75 and 56. On 21.2.1991 Ex. 66, the objection application was registered in Inward Register at Sr. No. 3852 vide Ex. 48. On 8.5.1991, the TPC was constituted consisting of six members for the period during 8.5.1991 to 7.5.1992. The accused was appointed as the Chairman. The meeting of the TPC was held on 30.5.1991 at 1.00p.m., in that meeting, the objection applications were rejected and the resolutions were passed accordingly. On 30.7.1991, the General Meeting of the Nagarpalika was held and vide Resolution No. 154 Ex. 49 it was decided to produce the revised plan after necessary modification by the TPC. On 8.8.1991, a request was made to Nagarpalika to take appropriate action. Thereafter, the meeting was called on 29.10.1991.