STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. SHAMRAO L. PATIL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Appeal against acquittal has been fled by the State of Maharashtra invoking Sec. 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, challenging the Judgment and Order of the Special Judge, Greater Mumbai dtd. 17/2/2003, in Special Case No.57 of 1987.

(2.) The charges against the Respondents i.e. the Original Accused Nos. 1 to 6 in Special Case No.57 of 1987 in brief are that; the accused have committed offence of misconduct, and abetment of misconduct punishable under Ss. 5(1)(d) and 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 (for short "the P.C. Act, 1947") r/w Sec. 109, 466, 467, 468, 471, 420 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code. The offence of conspiracy and other offences are alleged to have been committed at Mumbai between 30/11/1981 to 29/7/1982. It is alleged that conspiracy was hatched for correction of area in property registration card (hereinafter referred to as "PR Card"), in respect of City Survey No. E/311 of Bandra (West), old plot No.440 of Khar. The area of the plot was increased from 783.5 sq. mts. to 866.2 sq. mts. by 82.7 sq. mts, by way of correction. Accused Nos. 1 to 6 are the respondents in the present Appeal. Accused No. 1 a City Survey Offcer, was working in the CTSO No.III, Bandra in the year 1981-82. Accused No.2 was Sheristedar working under Accused No.1. Since he expired during the trial, Original Accused No. 3 Prabhakar Pokale was made Accused No. 2, who was a Maintenance Surveyor in the offce of City Survey. Accused No. 3 was working as clerk in the offce of Superintendent of Land Records (SLR), i.e. Accused No. 4. Accused No. 5 is the Builder and Accused No. 6 Bhanuprasad Sutar is the Architect who was engaged by Accused No.5 for the development project of CTS No. E/311 of Bandra.

(3.) It is the case of the prosecution that Original Accused No. 5 had purchased a plot i.e. CTS No. E/311, Bandra from deceased Gyan Kaur by Conveyance Deed dtd. 3/12/1981. Gyan Kaur had executed a Power of Attorney dtd. 12/1/1982 in favour of Accused No. 5, on the basis of which Accused No. 5 submitted an application to the City Survey Offcer ("CTSO") III on 30/11/1981, requesting for the measurement and survey of the property. In furtherance of the request made by Accused No. 5, Accused No.1 in capacity as a CTSO has taken steps for conducting the survey. He appointed Accused No. 2, the Maintenance Surveyor to complete the work of survey. Accordingly, Accused No. 2 carried out the survey of the plot on 18/1/1982. After completion of survey he found that, the area of plot was more than the area shown on record. The P.R. Card refected the area to be 783.5 sq. mts. However on the site, after measurement the area was found to be 866.2 sq. mts, equivalent to 1052/1057 sq. yards. After vasalevar calculation, he submitted his report to Accused No. 1 i.e. CTSO. Accused No. 1 approved it and sent it to the SLR i.e. Accused No. 4 for his approval. Accused No.3, the clerk in the offce of Accused No.4 prepared a 'note of confrmationn and Accused No. 4 approved it, thereby approving the corrections in the area, to be made in the original property record. The corrections were made in the original record and entry to that effect was taken in the P.R. Card which was issued to the Original Accused No. 5. After receiving corrected P.R. Card, Accused No. 5 made an application to the BMC on 8/5/1982, seeking permission for proposed building on CTS No.E/311 i.e. Plot No. 440 Khar, Bandra. Alongwith that application the Accused No. 6 had fled a Letter of Consent to supervise the work of construction. The P.R. Card was attached alongwith application showing area 887.20 sq. mts. and the building plans were prepared on the basis of the increased area submitted with the application. On the basis of the application, building permission was granted on 10/6/1982. The building construction commenced on the basis of the commencement certifcate dtd. 12/9/1983. After completion of the construction of the building, the occupancy certifcate was also issued by the corporation.