STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. VITHALRAO DHARMAJIRAO MUDHOLKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is filed by the State of Maharashtra against the order of acquittal passed by the learned Special Judge, Nanded acquitting all the accused persons of the offences punishable under Sections 120 B, 4C6. 409, 465 and 477 A of the Indian Penal Code and original accused Nos. 1 and 2 for the offence punishable under Section 5 (1) (c) read with Section 5 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act.

(2.) It is the case cf the prosecution that original accused Nos. 3 to 5 were partners in the building work carrying on business in the name and style of A. M, patel and Company. They had entered into a contract with the State government for doing lining work of Mile No. 10 to 12 of the Manar Project Work Accused No. 1 Vithalrao Mudholker was the Deputy Engineer supervising the work. His direct subordinate was accused No. 2 Govind Gundiba Cement required for the work was to be supplied by the State Government to the contractor and ultimately price thereof was to be deducted from the value of the work, done by him It is the case of the prosecution that the cement required for the work was obtained by the contractor under an indent signed by accused Nos 1 and 2. After receipt of the required stock of cement the contractor was under an obligation to store the same in a godown. The cement was to be utilised exclusively for the specified work Accused Nos. 6 was in the employment of the contractor and accused Nos. 7 and 8 are the merchants doing business at Naigaon We are not concerned with accused No. 9 in this appeal, as his acquittal has not been challenged by the State Government. According to the prosecution all the accused persons entered into a conspiracy to pilfer the cement supplied by the State Government and to sell it in the black market. For this purpose accused Nos. 1 and 2 fabricated false records showing utilisation of cement far in excess of the true quentity employed and used. The cement pilferred was sold by the contractor with the active connviance of accused Nos, 1 & 2 to accused Nos. 7 & 8 Accused Nos. 6 & 9 lent active assistance to this design entertained by accused Nos. 1, 2, 3 to 5 and 7 & 8. The prosecution further alleged that on 11-6-1971 a truck loaded with cement bags over turned in the Canal area and those cement. bags then had been pilferred by the contractor with the connivance of accused Nos, 1 and 2 and were being carried to the godown of accused Nos. 7 and 8 Marotirao Ambulgekar (P W. 1) on learning of the mishap went to the spot and on the basis of the spot inspection addressed a complaint to Police Sub Inspector, Naigaon Police Station vide Exh. 18 and Head Constable Thakur was deputed to make an inquiry, On the basis of the said inquiry Thakur submitted a report and then P, S. I. Patil took over the inquiry and investigation, Simultaneously the irrigation and Power Department officials who were in charge of the project also commenced an inquiry through the higher officials Ultimately the matter was handed over to the Police Inspector of Anti Corruption Bureau, Nanded. The said Bureau requisitioned the services of an expert, Kale. Kale opined that 500 bags of cement had been pilferred and on the basis of this opinion the present prosecution was launched after obtaining the necessary sanction from the State Government.

(3.) The main charge against the accused persons was that they had entered into a conspiracy to misappropriate the cement stock belonging to the State Govt. and for that purpose accused Nos. 1 & 1 had forged false documents and accused Nos. 3 to 9 committed a criminal breach of trust vis-a-vis the said stock. The accused pleaded not guilty. Their case is one of denial. According to them Marotrao Ambulgekar (P.W. 1) harboured a grudge against them and accused Nos. 3 to 5 had incurred a wrath of several villagers by reason of their refusal to comply with the illegal request to construct this or that structure or engage this or that villager. In support of its case the prosecution examined as many as 16 witnesses. The prosecution also produced certain documentary evidence in support of its case. After appreciating all the evidence on record the learned Special Judge. Nanded came to the conlusion that the prosecution has miserably failed to make out any case against any of the accused persons The learned Judge found that the very entrustment of cement bags has net been proved by the prosecution. He further came to the conclusion that the principal witness relied upon by the prosecution to prove pilferage of cement viz. GanpatSahuji (P W. 4) is not a reliable witness. The prosecution has also failed to prove that the records maintained by accused Nos 1 and 2 of the cement consumption was false. The witnesses examined have failed to make out any case in this behalf also, Further, the estimate given by the various prosecution witnesses is, obviously based on their own inferances and the proseuction has failed to approach the Maharashtra Engineering Research Institute at Nasik which institute would have been in a position to ascertain the consumption of cement used for lining work, So far as the over turning of the truck is concerned, the witness admits that nothing unusual was discovered. In substence, therefore, the learned Judge found that the prosecution has failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt its case as the entire evidence is not only unsatisfactory but solely depends upon the guess work and the opinions of respective witnesses. As a result of this findings, the learned Judge acquitted all the accused persons of the various charges levelled against them. As already observed against this order of acquittal the present appeal has been filed.