YOGENDRA JAYANT SAID Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the order of conviction dated 20.1.1988, passed by the learned Special Judge, Nashik in Special Case No.2 of 1987, convicting the appellant-accused for the offence punishable under section 161 of I.P.C. and sentencing him to suffer R.I. for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.100/- in default to undergo further R.I. for two months. The appellant-accused was also convicted for the offence punishable under section 5(1) (d) r/w. section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 and sentenced to suffer R.I. for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.100/- in default to suffer further R.I. for two months. The substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) THE prosecution case in brief is that, the appellant-accused was working as Supply Inspector at Malegaon in 1986. That one Faruk Ansari, the complainant had applied for ration card for his uncle Mohmed Mustafa and his family members as the previous ration card had been lost. However, it reveals from the record that the lost ration card was found in 1985 and a Xerox copy was subsequently produced with a request that some more names should be added in the new ration card. It also reveals from the record that the appellant-accused had drafted proper application for card and recommended for issuing the ration card sought for by the complainant. It is the allegation for issuing the ration card that the accused demanded Rs.100/- from the complainant Ansari. According to complainant Ansari, he went to the office of the appellant-accused three times alongwith his friends. All the three time, it is alleged that the appellant-accused insisted for bringing Rs.100/- as illegal gratification or bribe, for issuing ration card. It also reveals from the record that the complainant Ansari who claimed to be a person who was generous enough to help the needy persons in getting them ration cards and he had no other business in doing so. It also reveals from the record that it was the habit of the complainant of making complaints against the supply department regarding delay in issuing ration cards.

(3.) AFTER recording the evidence, the learned Judge held the charge to be proved against the appellant-accused and convicted him for the offences punishable u/s. 161 of I.P.C. and u/s. 5(1) (d) r/w. 5(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, and awarded sentence to suffer R.I. for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.100/- in default to suffer further R.I. for two months on each count, by his judgment and order dated 20.1.1988. Hence this appeal.