MANSUKHLAL VITHALDAS CHAUHAN Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Appeal is arising out of the judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Special Judge, Bharuch on 20.9.1986 in Special Case No. 3 of 1985 convicting the appellant -accused for the offences punishable under section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 (for short "the Act") and Section 161 of the I.P.C. and sentencing him to suffer R.I. for two years and a fine of Rs. 15,000 (rupees fifteen thousand only) in default to further undergo R.I. for one year for the offence punishable under Section 5(2) of the Act and further sentencing him to suffer R.I. for two years for the offence punishable under Section 161 of I.P.C. However, substantive sentences of imprisonment are ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) IT is the prosecution case that the appellant -accused, who was working as Divisional Accountant, which is Class -III post, in the Medium Irrigation Project in the year 1983, has demanded Rs. 20,000/ - from the complainant on 2.4.19 83 at about 11.00 P.M. at Bharuch. On the next day i.e. on 3.4.1983 the complainant went to Baroda and met the Deputy Director of Anti Corruption Shri Vaghela. On that day Police Inspector Shri Agravat of A.C.B. Bharuch was at Baroda. Therefore, he was called by Shri Vaghela at his office. Shri Agravat recorded the complaint of the complainant and asked him to come on the next day i.e. on 4.4.1983 at Bholav Rest House at Bharuch with the currency notes to be offered as bribe amount to the accused. On 4.4.1983 at Bholav Rest House, Shri Agravat called to Panch witnesses and the complaint of the complainant was read over to them and the complainant was introduced to the Panchas. Thereafter, usual procedure regarding anthracene powder was carried out. Panch No. 1 -Bachubhai Amdavadi -P.W. 2 Exh. 10 was asked accompany to complainant in the office of the accused. The complainant was asked not to pay the amount till demanded by the accused. Panch No. 1 was asked to give signal after the accused accepted the amount. Accordingly they reached at about 2.00 P.M. at the office of the accused.

(3.) ON 9.3.1984 the accused submitted an application (Exh. 45) to the Home Minister for handing over investigation of the case to an independent officer. On 13.3.1984 the Home Minister made endorsement on it and directed re - investigation and also directed not to take any proceedings till the report of re -investigation received. Accordingly re -investigation was carried out by the Assistant Director Shri Vaghela and he submitted his report against the accused in December 1984. Secretary of Gujarat Vigilance Commission by the letter dated 3.1.1985 recommended to give sanction to prosecute the accused as the prima facie case was found against the accused.