JAIRAMDAS JOTSINGH MENGHANI Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal against the order passed by the Special Judge for Greater Bombay convicting the appellant of two offences, under Section 161, Penal Code and under Section 161 or alternatively under Section 165 of the Code respectively, and sentencing him to rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a flue of Rs. 300/- in default rigorous imprisonment for three months for the first offence and to rigorous imprisonment for three months for the second offence. The two substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) THE case against the accused was that during the period of August to October 1954 he was an overseer in the Engineering Department of the Central Railway and as such a public servant. According to the prosecution case, in the month of October 1954 the accused attempted to obtain a sum of Rs. 200/- and did in fact accept a sum of Rs. 160/- from Dhondu Daji Mayekar as an illegal gratification and thereby he committed an offence punishable under Section 161, Penal Code. It was also alleged that on 28-10-1954 in the course of the same transaction he attempted to obtain and accepted from the said Mayekar Rs. 40/- by way of illegal gratification and thereby he committed an offence either under Section 161 or alternatively under Section 165, Penal Code. The accused denied that he had committed either of the two offences. The learned Judge who tried the case was satisfied that both the charges had been proved against the accused and so the trial of the accused ended in the order of conviction and sentence.

(3.) THE material facts giving rise to this case are very few. It appears that the Central Railway had given a contract to the Nav Yug Construction Company for the construction of type I and II staff quarters at Vasi. This contract was given to the Company in June 1954. The construction work however could not commence immediately, since Bombay had heavy rains in that year. The Company had its Bombay office at Parel but had also constructed a provisional office at Vasl. Mayekar and Bhosle did the supervision work at Vasi on behalf of the Company. Mayekar dealt with cash transactions and did outside work in addition to the supervision work at the sits, whereas Bhosle was the official representative. The accused as the overseer in the Engineering Department of the Central Railway had to attend to and supervise this construction work. In August-September 1954, the Company was found to be in arrears of this work and it was apprehended that the Company would not be able to complete the work of construction within the stipulated time. Besides, the work done by the Company was not always sanctioned by the supervisory staff including the accused and on some occasions they had to demolish the structures and make fresh constructions. The prosecution case is that Mayekar was approached by the accused 10 or 12 days after the month of October commenced and he was told plainly that if the company wanted to complete the work satisfactorily without obstruction from the accused the Company would have to pay the accused Rs. 200/- per month. Mayekar then told the accused that he was merely an employee of the Company and he could do nothing m the matter unless he consulted his superior officers. Accordingly Mayekar Informed Maganlal, a partner of Nav Yug Company, but Maganlal was not amenable to satisfy the illegal demand of the accused. On the contrary, Mayekar was advised by Maganlal to contact the Anti-Corruption Branch and to make arrangements for the levy of a trap against the accused. Pursuant to these instructions, Mayekar reported the matter to the Anti-Corruption Branch on 25-10-1954. Sub-Inspector Desai recorded the statement, of Mayekar. On 28-10-1954 the accused again approached Mayekar. Mayekar told the accused that his master had not given him any money to be paid to the accused. The accused then pressed Mayekar to pay him some money as Diwali Bakshis. The accused had seen some money with Mayekar and so, according to the prosecution, Mayekar had to part with Rs. 40/- in favour of the accused. When Rs. 40/- were thus paid to the accused, the accused again insisted that Rs. 200/- would have to be paid to him. On the 30th of October the accused again inquired from Mayekar as to what had happened about his proposal and an appointment was fixed between them for the payment of the amount the next day at the place where the works were being carried out. Mayekar then rang up the Anti-Corruption Branch and the trap machinery went into action the next day. Marked currency notes of Rs. 200/-were given to Mayekar whose person had been searched in the presence of panchas. The party consisted of three panchas, Mayekar, Sub-Inspector Desai and they also took the assistance of a photographer who was asked to take a movie picture of the material incidents.