MAHAVEER SINGH MEHTA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment dated 10.2.1984 passed by Special Judge for A.C.D. cases, Jaipur, whereby the accused appellant is found guilty for the offence punishable under Sections 409, 467 and 420 IPC, and u/Section 5 (i) (C) (2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, and sentenced him under Section 409 IPC to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a period of two and half years and to pay a fine of Rs. 5000/ -,(Rupees five thousand), in default of the payment of fine he was directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months. The appellant was sentenced under Section 467 IPC to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 5000/ -, in default of the payment of fine he was directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months. The appellant was further sentenced under Section 420 IPC to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 3000/ -, (Rupees three thousand), in default of the payment of fine he was further directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of five months. The appellant was further sentenced under Section 5 (i)(c) r/w Section (2) Prevention of Corruption Act to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/ - (Rupees one thousand), in default of the payment of fine he was further directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three months. All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated the facts of the case are that on 9.2.1977 Mewa Ram (PW -2) lodged a written report Ex. P/2 to the I.G.P. (ACD), Jaipur, alleging therein that he had shown Baisakhi Moong in his field and he was to get Rs. 252.75 as subsidy from the Government. He requested several times to the Agriculture Officer for the same and he was given assurance but after inquiry he found that the amount was shown in the cash book to have been given on 25.12.1976 against his name and in the muster roll his thumb impression on stamp was got affixed and it he had been verified by the Agriculture Officer. After making complaint he was pressurised that he show sign in the back date and should take the amount. He did not want that,such type of corruption be developed and should share in it. In that report it was prayed that immediate action be taken otherwise the employee of the Agriculture Department would change the muster roll because after his complaint all the officers of the Department had come to know about it and they were bent upon to destroy the evidence. On this report, a case was registered under Sections 409/ 420/467 I.P.C. and under Section 5 (i) (c) r/w Section (2) Prevention of Corruption Act, and investigation started. The A.C.D. Jaipur, after completing the investigation, submitted a challan in the Court of Special Judge, who after holding trial convicted and sentenced the accused appellant as indicated above, hence this appeal.

(3.) HEARD learned Counsel for the parties and perused the entire record.