R POOVARAGASAMY Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been preferred by A1 & A2 in Special C.C.No.54 of 1992 on the file of the Special Judge-cum-Ist additional District and Sessions Judge-Cum-Chief Judicial Magistrate, Salem.

(2.) THE short facts of the prosecution case is that A1 being a panchayat Union Additional Regional Development Officer and A2 being an Accountant in the Panchayat Union office at Vazhapadi Union, have demanded a sum of Rs.1,990/- from P.W.3 on 8.3.1991 as an illegal gratification for passing the cheque to the tune of Rs.26,937/- being the balance amount payable to P.W.3 for the work of construction of a building in Muthampatti panchayat office and received the said amount on 8.3.1991 from P.W.3, which attracts an offence under Section 7 and 13(1)(d) r/w 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

(3.) P.W.2 is the then Collector of Salem. According to him, he had received a letter dated 16.7.1991 from the Directorate of Vigilance and Anti Corruption Department, requesting him to issue sanction order for prosecution against A2 and that he carefully perused the records sent by the Vigilance and Anti Corruption Department and after getting himself satisfied regarding the prima facie case made out against A2, who was working as an accountant in the Vazhapadi Punchayat Union at that time, accorded sanction for prosecution against A2 on 31.7.1991.