OM DUTT SHARMA CONVICT Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These are two connected matters. Criminal Appeal No. 1901 of 1957 has been filed by Om Dutt Sharma against his conviction under Section 161 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 5(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act (Act II of 1947). The appellant has been sentenced by the learned Special Judge of Rampur under Section 161 of the Indian Penal Code to pay a fine of Rs. 150/- and in default of payment of fine to rigorous imprisonment for six months, and under Section 5(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act to pay a fine of Rs. 100/- and in default of payment of fine to rigorous imprisonment for three months. On a perusal of the Sessions statement, our brother, S. N. Sahai, J., issued notice to Om Dutt Sharma to show cause why the sentences imposed upon him should not be enhanced. This has given rise to the connected Criminal Revision No. 1295 of 1958. It will be convenient to dispose of both the criminal appeal and the criminal revision by one judgment.

(2.) The facts, about which there is no controversy, are as follows: Satish Chandra complainant is the proprietor of a chemists and drugists shop in Rampur, known as Satish Medical Hall, He had obtained two licences (Exs. P-2 and P-3) granted to him by the Municipal Board on 3-5-1954. One of the licences was for biological and the other for non-biological drugs. These licences were due to expire on 3-5-1956. Om Dutt Sharma, the appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 1901 of 1957, (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), was employed as the drugs clerk in the office of the Medical Officer of Health, Municipal Board, Rampur, in 1956. The appellant and the complainant, Satish Chandra, were allegedly friends. On 20-4-1956 Satish Chandra applied for renewal of his licences and along with his applications he also submitted the requisite treasury challans in respect of the fees payable for the licence. On 3-5-1956 the appellant made the following report on the applications of Satish Chandra: "Not recommended as not being a qualified man." Satish Chandra's application for the renewal of the licences was rejected by the licensing officer on the same date, that is, 3-5-1956. On 11-5-1956 at about 6 p. m. the appellant visited the shop of Satish Chandra and he was paid a sum of Rs. 20/- in currency notes by Satish Chandra. According to the prosecution, the sum of Rs. 20/- was paid to the appellant as illegal gratification for the purpose of securing the renewal of the licences in favour of Satish Chandra. The prosecution case, in detail, was as follows:

(3.) Anurudh Singh lodged a first information report at Police Station Kotwali, Rampur, on 11-5-1956 at 7-20 p. m. The sanction for the prosecution of the appellant (Ex. P1) was obtained from the Director of Medical and Health Services, Uttar Pradesh, and thereafter the appellant was prosecuted, tried, convicted and sentenced as mentioned above.