STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH Vs. KANSHI RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this appeal, State has challenged the judgment of acquittal dated 20.6.2002 rendered by Special Judge, Bilaspur, whereby Respondent Kanshi Ram, who alongwith one Jodh Singh (now dead), was tried for offences, under Sections 409, 120B, 420, 467, 471 Indian Penal Code and Section 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, has been acquitted.

(2.) RESPONDENT was the Pradhan of Gram Panchayat, Kotla (District Bilaspur) in the year 1991. An estimate for adding a storey to the Panchayat Bhawan, consisting of two rooms, a kitchen and a stair case was prepared. The estimated value of the work was Rs. 41,000/ and odds. A sum of Rs. 25,000/ - was initially sanctioned by the Panchayat by passing a resolution. The Respondent was authorized to withdraw and utilize the money for the aforesaid work. He withdrew Rs. 15,000/ - on 29.4.1991, Rs. 5000/ - on 12.7.1991 and Rs. 3000/ - together with bank interest amounting to Rs. 2043/ - on 19.8.1991. However, no entry in the books of account maintained by the Panchayat Secretary, namely Jodh Singh (now dead) had been made. Later on, an entry was made in the record of Panchayat, showing expenditure of Rs. 34,277.87 on the aforesaid work of addition to the Panchayat Bhawan.

(3.) MATTER came to be reported to the police. Investigation was carried out. It was revealed that only a sum of Rs. 21,600/ - had been spent on addition of a floor to the Panchayat Bhawan, but in the record, a sum of Rs. 34,277/ - was shown to have been spent on it. As regards shops and stalls, the investigation revealed that only foundation had been laid and that too without use of cement and there was thus misappropriation of withdrawn amount of Rs. 20,000/ -on account of this work. Specimen signatures of the Respondent were taken to compare the same with the signatures on bank documents pertaining to the withdrawal of money. Specimen signatures and the bank papers were sent to the handwriting expert PW 11 M.L. Sharma, who gave the opinion that signatures on the bank papers tallied with the specimen signatures of the Respondent. On completion of investigation, report under Section 173 Code of Criminal Procedure, alongwith relevant papers was filed in the court of Special Judge, who after complying with the requirement of Section 207 Code of Criminal Procedure, charged the Respondent with offences under Sections 409 read with 120B, 420, 467, 471 Indian Penal Code and Section 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Respondent pleaded not guilty to the charge and was therefore, tried for the aforesaid offences.