SANTI PRASAD GOENKA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two criminal revisions arising out of the common judgment dated 11.09.2003 passed by the learned Special Judge, Shillong, in Special (CBI) Case No. 1 of 2002 are heard together and are being disposed of by a common judgment.

(2.) Criminal Revision No. 45 of 2003 is filed by the accused No. 1, namely, Mrs. LR Mithran., IRS, who is charged with the offence punishable under Section 11 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 ("the Act" for short) while Criminal Revision No. 42 of 2003 is filed by the accused No.2, namely, Mr. SP Goenka, who is charged with the offence punishable under Section 12 of the Act. To simplify the narration of the case and also for better appreciation of the facts involved therein, I shall mainly deal with Criminal Revision No. 45 of 2003 and shall also refer to the petitioner in Criminal Revision No. 45 as the accused No. 1 and the petitioner in Criminal No. 42 of 2003 as the accused No, 2.

(3.) Shorn of details, the case of the prosecution is that while the accused No. 1 was adjudicating the Excise Evasion case of M/s Kitply Industry Ltd., Calcutta, of which the accused No. 2 is the Chairman, she slashed down the Central Excise Duty payable by the former from thirty crores rupees to nine crores rupees, which caused financial loss to the Central Government to the order of rupees twenty-seven crores and conversely caused pecuniary advantage to her sons and other family members. The prosecution charges that the accused No. 2 had donated Rs. 8,01,955/- in favour of Zami Memorial Charitable Trust, which stood in the name of the mother of the accused No. 1. The charge specifically states that the accused Mo. 1 is one of the trustees of the Trust in question, in the name whereof a sum of Rs. 5,00,000/- and a Tata Mobile vehicle was donated by M/s Kitply Industry Ltd. The prosecution further alleges that during search of the house of the accused No. 1, the sale certificate dated 11.11.96 in respect of the vehicle was recovered while: the letter dated 14.08.97 of Warren Tea Ltd., addressed to Zami Memorial Charitable Trust was also recovered from her possession which shows that Rs. 8,01,955/- was given as donation towards the cost of the said vehicle and the donation of Rs. 5,00,000/- to the trust, for which the trust was requested to issue a certificate u/s 80 G for claiming a relief of income tax. To put simply, the charge of the prosecution is that there was quide pro quo between the slashing down of the Central Excise Duty by the accused No. 1 in the said adjudication proceeding and the aforesaid donations made by the accused No. 2, who is also the Advisor of the Board of Directors of M/s Warren Tea Ltd., which in turn is controlled by his two sons. Thus, according to the prosecution, the accused No. 1 has committed the offence U/s 11 of the Act while the accused No. 2 abetted the commission of the said offence by the accused No. 1 and is punishable U/s 12 of the Act.