R V D R K PRASAD Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two appeals arise out of the judgment of the Court of Special Judge for CBI Cases, Visakhapatnam, in C.C.No. 4 of 1995. A-l therein had filed Crl.A.No. 1062 of 1996 and A-2 had filed Crl.A.No. 1063 of 1996. Hence, they are disposed of through a common judgment.

(2.) A-l and A-2 were tried for offences under Sections 7 and 13(1))(d)(ii) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (Hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') in C.C.No.4/1995. The trial Court, through its judgment dated 10-12-1996, had convicted them for the said offences. A-1 was sentenced to undergo RI for one year and to a pay fine of Rs. 1,000/-; in default to undergo SI for 3 months for the offence under Section 7 of the Act. Similar sentence was ordered for the offence under Section 13(1) (d) (ii) read with Section 13(2) of the Act. A-2 was sentenced to undergo RI for 6 months and to pay a fine of Rs. 200/-; in default to undergo SI for 15 days, for the offence under Section 7 of the Act and to undergo RI for 1 year and to pay a fine of Rs. 300 /-; in default fo undergo SI for 1 month, for the offence under Section 13(1) (d) (ii) read with Section 13(2) of the Act. Both the sentences were directed to run concurrently.

(3.) The case, as presented by the prosecution, is as follows:- A-1 was working as Enforcement officer (Provident Fund Inspector) in the office of the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Visakhapatnam during the year 1994. A-2 was working as UDC under him. P.W. 1 is the proprietor of M/s. Sunisha Engineering Works, Visakhapatnam. He has executed some works in the Visakhapatnam Steel Plant. He was to be paid the final bill for the works executed by him. For the settlement of final bills, Provident Fund Clearance Certificate (hereinafter referred to as 'the Certificate') to be issued by the jurisdictional Enforcement Officer of the Provident Fund was necessary. On 21-10-1994, P.W. 1 had approached A-1 and requested him to issue the said Certificate. A-1 had handed over a slip to him wherein the documents to be produced for issuance of such Certificate were mentioned. Having issued the slip marked as Ex.P-1, A-1 is also alleged to have demanded a sum of Rs. 400/- for himself and Rs. 50/- for A-2 for issuing the Certificate. Though P.W.I expressed his financial difficulties in paying the amount, A-1 insisted for payment of the same. The certificate was to be collected on 28-10-1994 at 4.00 p.m.