GATORBHAI BHIKHABHAI PATEL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal is preferred by the appellant-orig. accused (hereinafter referred to as 'the appellant') under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, who has been held guilty by the learned Special Judge, Surendranagar, vide his judgment and order dated 07th March, 1990 for the offences punishable under Section 5(2) read with Section 5(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). At the conclusion of the trial of Sessions Case No.2 of 1987, the appellant is sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 5 (five) years and a fine of Rs.500/- (Rupees Five Hundred only); in default of payment of amount of fine to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months. The appellant is also held guilty for the charge punishable under Section 161 of the Indian Penal Code and for the same, he is asked to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year. As per the operative part of the order under challenge, the substantive sentence is ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) The judgment and order under challenge has been assailed on various grounds mentioned in paragraph no.7 of the memo of the appeal and Shri K.J. Shethna, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant, has taken the Court through the main grounds of challenge and the relevant part of the judgment and order assigning reasons for recording conviction. The appellant being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the legality and validity of the judgment and order of conviction and sentence, has assailed the finding recorded by the learned trial Court by way of this appeal on the grounds mentioned in the aforesaid paragraph no.7. I have heard Shri Shethna, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant and Shri A.J. Desai, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, appearing on behalf of the respondent-State at length; and both of them have taken this Court through the oral as well as documentary evidence led during the course of trial.

(3.) To appreciate the rival contentions which have been placed before this Court, it would be necessary to state the facts of prosecution case in brief which were placed before the learned trial Court : The complainant-Ramabhai Tapubhai is an owner of about 30 vighas of land situated in the sim of village Zinzuda, Tal. Chotila and he was cultivating the said land. According to the complainant, about 25 years prior to the date of incident in question, his father had purchased the land in question from one Dana Deva.