HAMID LONE Vs. STATE OF J AND K

JUDGEMENT

(1.) One Peer Shafrief-ud-din filed complaint before Superintendent of Police Vigilance Organization, Srinagar on 28th Sept. 2001, stating therein that in the year 1990-2000, he was working as Clerk (Munshi) in the shop of one Bashir Ahmad Dar who is carrying on business in Fruit Mandi, under the name and style of M/s Dar Fruit Growers. The period of employment expired on 31st of March 2000, whereafter his employer threw him out of job. It was also complained that entire salary including bonus etc remained deposited with the employer who in order to gobble-up the same did not pay it to him, which constrained him to file a claim before the Dy Labour Commissioner under Payment of Wages Act (for short the Authority) on 15th May 2000 wherein a prayer was made for issuance of direction to Bashir Ahmad Dar for payment of wages etc to the complainant.

(2.) After hearing Id counsel for parties, Id trial judge ordered for framing of the charge against the Appellant for having allegedly committed the offence punishable Under Section 5(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act 2006 read with Section 161 of RPC. The Appellant pleaded not guilty and was accordingly put on trial. The prosecution examined the witnesses and thereafter the statement of the Appellant was recorded under Section 342 Code of Criminal Procedure on 11th of Oct. 2004. The Appellant examined witnesses in defence to prove his innocence.

(3.) After conclusion of trial and after hearing the Id counsel for parties, the Id trial judge vide its judgment dated 10th Dec. 2009 convicted the Appellant under Section 161 RPC and 5(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act 2006. The Appellant was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year for the commission of offence Under Section 161 RPC and was also sentenced to undergo two years rigorous imprisonment Under Section 5(2) of P. C Act 2006 and a fine of Rs. 1000/-. It was directed that in default of payment of fine, the Appellant shall undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month. It is this order and judgment which is called in question in this appeal by the Appellant.