STATE Vs. RAGHUNATH PATNAIK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE respondent stood charged under Section 5(2) read with Section 5(l)(d). of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') for obtaining pecuniary advantage from himself to an extent of Rs.2146 -56 paise in the year 1975 by using forged bus warrants at different places in his capacity as a public servant while serving as a Constable attached to the Vigilance Wing of the Police Department at Sambalpur. He also stood charged under Section 467 of the Indian Penal Code (for short, the 'Code') for forging the bus warrants which were valuable securities with the intent to defraud the State Government and gain pecuniary advantage in respect of the aforesaid amount and under Section 471 of the Code for having fraudulently and dishonestly used as genuine the forged bus warrants having known and having reasons to believe at the time of such use that these documents were forged ones. On a consideration of the prosecution evidence, the learned Special Judge has found that none of the charges has been brought home to the respondent and has acquitted him of the said charges. The order of acquittal recorded by the learned Special Judge has been assailed in this Court.

(2.) I have heard Mr. D. P. Sahoo, the learned Standing Counsel and Mr. Rath for the respondent.

(3.) AS has been submitted by the learned counsel for both the sides, there is no evidence that the respondent had produced the warrants in question before the bus conductors who had been examined in the Court. There was thus complete absence of evidence that the respondent had gained pecuniary advantage by producing and using the bus warrants. Thus the charges under Section 5(2) read with Section 5(1) (d) of the Act and Section 471 of the Code had not been established.