T D GULATI Vs. STATE OF RAJASRHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) APPELLANT T. D. Gulati was tried for the offences under sections 120-B and 420 I. P. C. and Sec. 5 (2) read with section 5 (l) (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act by the Special Judge. (S. P. E.) Rajasthan, Jaipur. By the judgment dated July 19, 1975 he was held guilty for the aforesaid offences and sentenced to one year's rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to undergo three months rigorus imprisonment on each count with an order that the substantive sentences shall run concurrently.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated the facts of the case leading to the trial and the conviction of the appellant are as under:-

(3.) THE prosecution case is that the appellant had entered into a conspiracy with the Doctors for getting his bogus essentiality certificate verified without there being any body ill in his family or there being any requirements for any medicine Mohan Lal Proprietor of Prince Medical Stores, Jodhpur was also made a party to that conspiracy and 10% of the amount of the bill for his issuing cash memos without supplying the medicines was offered to him. According to Mohanlal the appellant had named Dr. S. K. Pathak, Dr. Ramdeo, Dr. B. N. Kalla, Dr. Barmera and Dr. S. L Mathur. to be the persons from whom he was in a position to get the essentiality certificates on the basis of bogus cash memos. None of these doctors have been examined by the prosecution. THE reason for not doing so and its effect on the prosecution case, will be discussed at relevant place. Suffice it for the present that the learned Special Judge has taken serious note to the prosecution not caring to bring those doctors who had signed the essentiality certificates in the witness box. THE learned Special Judge, however, did not consider these infirmities of the prosecution as damaging its case for the reason that those doctors were not at trial before him. Prosecution has examined a good number of stockists, suppliers of medicines, from whom during the course of investigation reports were obtained to show whether particular medicines were supplied by them to Prince Medical Stores at the relevant time or not. THE learned Special Judge, in view of the statement of the Approver that medicines from Jaipur and Jodhpur could be obtained without issuing cash-memos and that he also used to do the same, observed that the prosecution has wasted the time of the court in examining a large number of witnesses for that purpose. THE learned Judge, however, found the appellant guilty on the basis of the statement of Approver Mohanlal, Proprietor of Prince Medical Stores sought corroborated by Jagdish (P. W. 56) nephew of the Approver, who in his absence is said to have issued cash memos to the appellant without supplying medicines to him. Another piece of corroborative evidence that the learned Special Judge has taken into consideration is the testimony of G. V. Ramanamurty (P. W. 42) Accounts Officer in the C. B. I, who had examined the record available at the Prince Medical Stores and gave the opinion that some of the medicines in the cash memos were not in the stock of the Prince Medical Stores at the relevant date. THE appellant has admitted that he got the bills reimbursed on the basis of the cash-memos obtained from the Prince Medical Stores, but stated that he had obtained the medicines for the use of the patients mentioned in the essentiality certificates.