RAM PAL SINGH CHAUHAN Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Court of learned Special Judge (under Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988), Kaithal (here-in-after referred to as, the trial court) tried the appellant for commission of offences punishable under Section 15 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (for short, the 1988 Act), Section 427 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, IPC) and Section 3 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984 (for short, the 1984 Act) and vide judgement dated July 18, 2005, acquitted him of the offence punishable under Section 15 of the 1988 Act but convicted him of the offences punishable under Section 427, IPC, and Section 3 of the 1984 Act and vide order dated July 20, 2005 sentenced him to rigorous imprisonment for a term of five years with fine amounting to Rs. 50,000/- and in default of payment of fine to further rigorous imprisonment for a term of one year under Section 3 of the 1984 Act and rigorous imprisonment for a term of two years under Section 427, IPC. To assail the correctness of the findings of conviction and consequent award of punishment, appellant has come up before this Court by way of the instant appeal.

(2.) State is contesting the appeal.

(3.) Fact situation constituting the prosecution story suggests that during the year 1995-96, Haryana State Cooperative Supply and Marketing Federation Limited (in short 'HAFED') purchased wheat in Kithana Mandi and in order to shift the wheat from Kithana Mandi to Kaithal, tender of Kapil Muni Truck Union, Kalayat was accepted. After 11600 bags of wheat had been shifted from Kithana to Kaithal during the period April 23, 1995 to April 29, 1995, the appellant issued a chit (copy Exhibit PL) to Field Inspector Jai Singh (PW-15) instructing him to let Kaithal Union, instead of Kapil Muni Truck Union, lift the wheat. This led to a dispute between the two Unions. Appellant, on having come to know of the dispute, took the chit back. Wheat worth Rs. 87,00,000/-, thus, remained lying there at Kithana Mandi and was damaged by the floods. According to case of the prosecution, the chit, Exhibit PL, was issued by the appellant because Kapil Muni Truck Union did not meet his demand of illegal gratification of Rs. 2/- per bag whereas the Kaithal Union had agreed to pay him Rs. 100/- per bag. The matter was inquired into by State Vigilance Bureau and on the basis of report, Exhibit PA, a formal First Information Report (FIR, for short), Exhibit PA/1, came to be recorded. Matter was investigated into. Statements of witnesses were recorded. Necessary documents were taken into police possession. Sanction for prosecution of the appellant was obtained. A report in terms of Section 173(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC, for short) was presented before the learned trial court. Appellant was charged for commission of offences punishable under Section 15 of the 1988 Act, Section 427, IPC, and Section 3 of the 1984 Act.