HIRALAL DAHYABHAI PARMAR Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present conviction Appeal has been filed by the appellants original accused under Section 374 of the Cr. P.C., against the Judgment and order dated 10.08.2001 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Junagadh, in Special Case No.03 of 1990, whereby the appellant-accused was convicted for the offences punishable under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and sentenced to undergo 2 years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default of payment of fine, further simple imprisonment of 6 months and for the offence punishable under Sections-13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and sentence to undergo 3 years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.2,000/-, in default of payment of fine, further simple imprisonment of 6 months.

(2.) According to the prosecution case, one Pathubha Govindji Rathod an agriculturist, resident of village Arena, Taluka: Mangrol, District: Junagadh, approached ACB Office on 12.08.1989 and disclosed that he had 20 vigha agriculture land and in his village on, 18.08.1988, murder took place of Karsan Arjan and in that case, he was arrested by the police and remained in Junagadh jail from 23.08.1988 to 16.06.1989. During the said period, one Nirubhai Jalubhai Sarvaiya was with him and they became friends and the complainant known all the staff of the jail. The complainant was acquitted on 16.06.1989 from the said case. On 12.08.1989, he went to Junagadh to meet his friend Nirubhai at District Jail, Junagadh and he disclosed his name as visitor to Parbatsinh Police Officer. During that time, one Hiralal Vaghela was on duty in visit room and the complainant also known to him. During the said meeting, Nirubha told the complainant that in the jail he could not manage for Bidi and Cigarettes, to which complainant replied that it was not possible to arrange in jail. Hiralal, who was listening the conversation intervened and told that he could manage the same, but one had to pay for it. On being asked asked by the complainant to Nirubha that what he brought, he replied that three packets of Bristol and four packets of Shivaji Bidi.

(3.) On the basis of above allegations, charge was framed against the appellants-accused vide Exh.11 and read-over and explained to the appellants-accused for the offences punishable under Sections 7, 13(1)(d) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Then plea was recorded, wherein, appellants-accused pleaded not guilty to the charge and claimed to be tried.