MADAN LAL Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These criminal appeals under Sec. 374 Cr.P.C. have been preferred against the judgment dtd. 23/3/2000 passed by the learned Special Judge, Prevention of Corruption Act Cases, Bikaner in Sessions (Prevention of Corruption) Case No.11/95 (121/97), whereby the accused-appellants were convicted for the offences under Ss. 7 & 13(1)(d) read with Sec. 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as 'Act of 1988'); for the offence under Sec. 7, each of the accused- appellants were sentenced to undergo six months rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs.1,000.00 and; for the offence under Sec. 13(1)(d) read with Sec. 13(2), each of the accused- appellants were sentenced to undergo one year's rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs.1,000.00; in default of payment of the aforesaid fine, each of the accused-appellants were to undergo further three months rigorous imprisonment. The sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) As the pleaded facts and the record would reveal, the charge against the present accused-appellants is that accused-appellant Madan Lal and accused-appellant Narendra Kumar, while, at the relevant time, being posted as Enforcement Inspector and Office Assistant, respectively, in the Supply Department, Sri Ganganagar, both being hand in glove with each other, demanded and received an illegal gratification to the tune of Rs.400.00 in to be shared equally (earlier demand of Rs.500.00 was made, but with due negotiation on count of poor financial condition of the complainant, the same was settled for a sum of Rs.400.00). 2.1 Such illegal gratification, as per the prosecution, was demanded and received by the accused-appellants, for the purpose of enabling the complainant (Sanjeev Kinara) to obtain the Rajasthan Trade Authority License (RTAL) (also referred to as 'license') in connection with sale of Food Grains and Food Oils; for obtaining such license, the complainant submitted an application before the Supply Department, Sri Ganganagar. 2.2 Furthermore, as per the prosecution, the accused-appellants, by corrupt and illegal means, while otherwise abusing their official position as a public servant, obtained for themselves the pecuniary advantage to the extent of the aforementioned illegal gratification from the complainant, for the purpose, as indicated above.

(3.) The genesis of the dispute is traceable to a written application submitted by the complainant on 30/6/1994 before the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Anti Corruption Bureau (ACB), Sri Ganganagar, to the effect, amongst others, that he had submitted an application for obtaining the license for the aforesaid purpose before the Department, wherein the accused-appellants, at the relevant time, were working in their respective official capacity; this is more so when, as per the complainant, he had completed all the requisite formalities and produced before the Department all the necessary documents, alongwith his application.