PALANIA PILLAI Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants Palania Pillai and K. Rasheed Ahmed were tried in C.C. No. 11 of 1985 on the fire of the IX Additional Special Judge, Madras, for offences punishable under S.5(1)(d) read with S.5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and S. 161, I.P.C. The second appellant was charged with the aid of S.109, I.P.C. Both the appellants were found guilty as charged and both of them were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- ; in default to undergo rigourous imprisonment for three months for the offence under the Prevention of Corruption Act. No separate sentence was imposed in respect of the offence under S. 161, I.P.C.

(2.) The facts leading to the conviction of the two appellants need narration. The appellants will henceforth the referred to as Al and A2 respectively. A1 at the relevant time was the Junior Engineer, Madras Telephone, Mambalam External. A2 was the Phone Inspector, Madras Telephones, attached to the same office. P.W.2, Murugesan, a resident of West Jones Road, Saidapet, was a finance broker, carrying on his business under the name and style of "Sivasankar Agencies" Sivakami, the daughter of P.W.2, was suffering from several ailments inclusive of skin disease, throat infection and ulcer in her stomach. In view of the sickness of his daughter, P.W. 2 wanted to have a casual telephone connection for a period of 60 days. The need for the request of a casual telephone connection was to facilitate emergency calls being made to the Doctor as and when necessary. P.W. 2, therefore, sent his application Ex. P.2 dated 11-9-1984 to the Deputy Area Manager (South), Madras Telephones. Along with Ex. P.2, P.W. 2 enclosed a medical certificate Ex. P.3 - issued by the Skin Specialist, affirming the need for frequent medical advice and medical care either in person or over the telephone. P.W. 2 went over to the Office of the Deputy Area Manager (South), Madras Telephones, on 15-9-1984. He was then directed to deposit a sum of Rs. 920/- within 15 days. A demand notice was also issued to him. On 21-9-1984 P.W. 2 deposited Rs. 920/- in cash, as advised. Even after such deposit, the casual telephone was not installed. Hence, on 29-9-1984 P.W. 2 got in touch with the Office of the Deputy Manager (South) over the Telephone. He was then informed that the casual telephone connection had been sanctioned even on 29-9-1984 and the telephone number allotted to him was 446001. He was also directed to got in touch with the Assistant Engineer, Telephone Exchange, Mambalam, for further details. Thereafter at or about 12 noon on 29-9-1984 P.W. 2 contacted the Office of the Assistant Engineer, Telephone Exchange, Mambalam, over the telephone. His call was answered by P. W. 6 V. J. Niyasudeen, the Assistant Engineer, P.W.6 informed P.W.2 that no communication had been received from the Office of the Deputy Area Manager. P.W. 2 again got in touch with the Office of the Deputy Area Manager (South) and learnt that even on 22-9-1984 a communication by registered post as well as by telex had been forwarded to P. W. 6. Again P. W. 2 contacted P.W. 6 over the telephone and furnished this information. P.W. 6 promised to look into the records and in case an advice note had been received, he would direct further action. P.W. 6 noted in Ex P.13, a scribbling pad, about the casual connection enquiry, made by P.W. 2 on 29-9-1984. P.W. 6, on verification, found that his Office had received the advice note Ex. P. 14 from the Deputy Area Manager (South) even on 27-9-1984 for providing a casual telephone connection immediately for 60 days from the date of installation, to P.W. 2. P.W. 6 thereafter contacted Al, the Junior Engineer, at or about 2 p.m. over the telephone and directed him to provide a casual telephone connection immediately at the residence of P.W. 2, in view of the sanction accorded by the Deputy Area Manager.

(3.) It is the further case of P.W. 2 that on 29-9-1984 at or about 4 p.m., A2 contacted him at his residence and introduced himself as the Telephone Inspector. He told P.W. 2 that a telephone connection had been sanctioned to him and his visit was to inspect the peace and fix the location of the telephone to be installed. A2 also told P.W. 2 that A1 had sent him and that both Al and A2 were the main persons responsible for providing a telephone connection at the residence of P.W. 2. A2 also informed P.W. 2 that there were complications in immediately providing a telephone connection which could be overcome, if P.W. 2 agreed to pay Rs. 300/ - as bribe. In the event of the payment of the bribe amount intended for both the accused, it was possible to install the telephone even on Monday (110-1984). In the event of non-payment of bribe as demanded, there was bound to be delay installing the casual telephone connection. A2 also informed P.W. 2 that both he and Al intended to meet P.W.2 at his residence at 12 noon on 1-10-1984 when the telephone connection would be given and that P.W. 2 should keep Rs. 300/- ready for payment as demanded. The evidence of P.W 2 does not indicate his re-action to the deemed made by A2 and his part of the conversation with the latter.