NILAMBAR MAHALIK Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant stood charged Under Section 5(2) read with Section 5(1)(c) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 (for short, the 'Act') for having dishonestly or fraudulently misappropriated or Otherwise converted to his own use a sum of Rs. 16,760.00 entrusted with him and kept under his control as a public servant while he was functioning as the Executive Engineer in charge of the Electrical Investigation Division -II by utilizing false bills and vouchers bearing No. D. C. V. No. 302 -A dated February 18, 1971 and D. C. V. No. 334 dated March 31, 1971 as genuine and Under Section 471 of the Indian Penal Code for having fraudulently or dishonestly used as genuine the aforesaid documents having known or having reasons to believe at the time of their use that they were forged documents, with the intention to misappropriate the moneys covered by the vouchers.

(2.) TO bring home the charges, the prosecution had examined fourteen witnesses. The appellant had pleaded not guilty to the charges and according to him, he had not committed either of the two offences. The appellant had examined three witnesses in his defence.

(3.) MR . R. Mohanty, the learned counsel for the appellant, has taken me through the relevant evidence and has contended that neither of the two charges has been Substantiated and the order of conviction is unfounded on facts and misconceived in law. He has also submitted that sanction to prosecute the appellant had not been accorded in accordance with the provisions made in Section 6 of Act. The learned Standing Counsel has submitted that sanction has duly been accorded. He has submitted that the evidence on record would not lead a Court to a conclusion that the appellant was guilty of the commission of either of, the two offences. Thus in view of the submission made by the learned Standing Counsel, no case has been made out against the appellant. I have, however examined the evidence in order to find out as to whether the concession made by the learned Standing Counsel is well -founded and for the reason to follow I find that it is acceptable.