MANGE RAM Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) MANGE Ram accused -appellant had been convicted by Special Judge, Narnaul vide judgment dated 22.2.1995 for offence under Section 13(1 )(E) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 for acquiring assets disproportionate to his known source of income. He has sentenced to Rl for two years and to pay fine of Rs. 10,000/ -. In default of payment of fine to further undergo Rl for two months.

(2.) AS per prosecution version, this mange Ram was recruited as a Forest Guard by the Forest Department of Haryana State in the year 1967. He was promoted as Forester in the year 1982. He belongs to a Scheduled Caste Community. One Kuldeep Singh of his village had made complaint Ex.PA that Mange Ram was just a pauper when he came into service but, thereafter, had acquired assets disproportionate to his known source of income. The matter was enquired into by Piare Lal Inspector who made enquiry report Ex.PH and came to the conclusion that there had been difference of income and

(3.) COUNSEL for the appellant in this case had pointed out that as per Enquiry Report Ex.PH of Piare Lai Inspector, Mange Ram has two sons. Sunil Kumar was elder and was residing separately whereas Satish Kumar was younger and was a student. That Sunil Kumar was running a Atta Chakki which had been given to him at the time of his marriage by his in -laws. That Sunil Kumar had said that he was selling cloth and was also doing agriculture, breeding cattle and residing separately from his father; that his marriage was celebrated in the year 1986; that father of Mange Ram had some land also. Even from statement of Om Parkash, father -in -law of Sunil Kumar, Piare Lai Inspector had written that Sunil Kumar was married in the year 1986 and at the time of marriage apart from other matrimonial articles, an Atta Chakki was also given.