LAKHAN PARASAR Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal appeal under Sec. 374(2) Cr.P.C. has been preferred against the judgment dtd. 30/6/2007 passed by the learned Special Judge (Sessions Court), Prevention of Corruption Act Cases, Udaipur in Special Criminal Sessions Case No. 9/2002, whereby the accused-appellant was convicted for the offences under Sec. 13(1)(d) read with Sec. 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as 'Act of 1988') and Sec. 420 IPC; for the offence under Sec. 13(1)(d) read with Sec. 13(2) of the Act of 1988, the accused-appellant was sentenced to undergo three years simple imprisonment and a fine of Rs.1000.00, in default of payment of which, he was to undergo further one month's imprisonment and; for the offence under Sec. 420 IPC, the accused-appellant was sentenced to undergo three years simple imprisonment and a fine of Rs.1000.00, in default of payment of which, he was to undergo further one month's imprisonment.

(2.) The bone of contention in the present case, as per the prosecution, is that the accused-appellant (posted then as Tracer in Urban Improvement Trust, Bhilwara) had submitted a false affidavit before the UIT, Bhilwara that neither he nor any of his family members had any land or residential house in the area concerned; as per the prosecution, the said false affidavit was submitted only with a view to obtain, by way of allotment, an additional plot of land (Plot No. 3-C-3 measuring 25 x 49 sq.ft. in R.C. Vyas Colony, Bhilwara), that too, at a concessional rate, thereby causing a loss to the public exchequer (UIT, Bhilwara), to the tune of Rs.58,717.77, as the said plot was allotted to the appellant on the basis of the said false affidavit.

(3.) As per the prosecution case, the aforementioned factual matrix was the outcome of an enquiry conducted into complaint No. 10/1998, and on the basis of the said outcome, an FIR No. 142/1998 was registered at Anti Corruption Bureau, Jaipur for the offences under Sec. 13(1)(d)(2) of the Act of 1988 and Ss. 420 and 120-B IPC against four persons, including the present accused-appellant, and upon investigation, a charge-sheet was filed only against the present accused-appellant for the said offences, before the learned court below. Upon the charges being framed, the same were denied by the accused-appellant, and thus, he was made to stand the trial, and the trial accordingly commenced.