BHAGIRATHI ROUTRAY AND Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two appeals are directed against the judgment in T.R. Case No. 17 of 1981 disposed of by the learned Special Judge (Vigilance), Sambalpur, where both the appellants were accused persons. They stood charged under S.5(1)(c)/5(1)(d) read with S.5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act (in short 'the Act'), S. 34 of the Penal Code (in short 'IPC') and S.409/471, IPC.

(2.) The learned trial Judge found both the appellants guilty of the above charges and sentenced each of them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.9,000/- and in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months more under S.5(1)(c)(5)(2) of the Act. They were also sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months each under S. 471 IPC with direction that the substantive sentences were to run concurrently. No separate sentence under S.5(1)(d) read with S. 5(2) of the Act, S.34 IPC and Section 409/ 34, IPC was imposed by the learned trial Judge.

(3.) The case of the prosecution as disclosed in the first information report (in short 'F.I.R.') lodged by the D.S.P. (Vigilance), Sambalpur is that appellant Hari Chandan (appellant in Crl. Appeal No.101 of 1984) was the Range Officer, Sadar, Sambalpur since 20-11-1978 and the appellant Bhagirathi Routray (appellant in Crl. Appeal No.100 of 1984) was the Forester under him since 23-1-1979. For construction of extension to a room in the office of Conservator of Forests, Sambalpur, the estimated amount of Rupees 26,000/- was entrusted to the appellant Hari Chandan by the Divisional Forest Officer, Sambalpur in two instalments i.e., Rupees 16,000/- on 13-2-1979 and Rs. 10,000/- on 30-6-1979, with direction to execute the work departmentally. According to the approved plan and estimate, one room measuring 18' X 15' with adjoining verandah and portico was to be constructed having R.C.C. roof. The work was executed through the Forester, appellant Bhagirathi Routray under the direct supervision of the appellant Hari Chandan and the entire amount had been shown to have been spent by September, 1979. A sum of Rs. 8,511.50 paise was claimed to have been spent, as evident from voucher No.192 dated 18-9-1979 for putting R.C.C. slabs over the roof of the room, adjoining verandah and portico and beating of Khuas over the R.C.C. casting etc. although the said work was not done till 28-2-1980, as found during spot verification. Besides, appellant Hari Chandan Misra also claimed to have spent Rs.45,865.34 paise for construction of the auction hall in the office premises of the D.F.O., Sambalpur. A sum of Rs.290/- was shown to have been spent towards coaltarring charges of refters fixed to the roof, and voucher No.202 dated 19-9-1979 for the said amount was submitted. As the coaltarring was not done till 4-3-1980, the voucher submitted was a false one. The informant lodged FIR against the appellants alleging misappropriation of Rs. 8,801.50 paise out of government money entrusted to them by submission of false vouchers.