K. RAMADOSS Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant is the sole accused in Special Case No. 2 of 2006 on the file of the Learned Special Judge under the Prevention of Corruption Act cum Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thoothukudi, Thoothukudi District. He stood charged for the offences punishable under Sections 7 and 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. By judgment dated 17.10.2008, the trial Court found him guilty under both charges and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 5000/ -, in default to undergo simple imprisonment for three months for the offence under Sections 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of the prevention of Corruption Act. However, the trial Court did not impose separate sentence for the offence under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act though he was convicted under the said provision also. Challenging the said conviction and sentence, the appellant is before this Court with this Criminal Appeal.

(2.) THE case of the prosecution in brief is as follows:

(3.) WHEN the above incriminating materials were put to the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C., he denied the same as false. According to him, P.W.2 had a very strong motive against him, because he was responsible for the cancellation of the contract awarded to P.W. 2. He has further stated that P.W.2 was so inimical towards him and because of that enmity, he made the false complaint. He has further stated that at the time of trap, when he was standing at the old bus - stand without his knowledge, currency notes were inserted into his handbag. He has further stated that he was taken to Vigilance and Anti -corruption police station where he was asked to take out the currency notes from the handbag and thereafter only phenolphthalein tests were conducted to his fingers. Thus according to him, the entire case is false. However, he did not choose to examine any witness on his side nor produce any documents. Having considered the above materials, the trial Court found him guilty under both the charges. But, the trial Court imposed sentence for the offence under Section 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and strangely did not impose any sentence for the offence under Section 7 Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. That is how the appellant is before this Court with this Criminal Appeal challenging the said conviction and sentence.