STATE OF RAJASTHAN Vs. BALDEO GOSWAMI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision is directed against the judgment of learned Special Judge, Anti -Corruption Cases, Bikaner dated 8 -7 -1987 whereby he has discharged the accused -non -petitioner of the offences under Sections 120B, 420, 465, 467, 468 and 471, IPC and Section 5(1)(d)(ii) of the Anti Corruption Act, 1947.

(2.) THE facts necessary to be noticed for the disposal of this revision petition briefly stated are: that in year 1980, the accused -non -petitioner Baldeo Goswami was posted as Executive Engineer, PHED Sardarshahar. He invited tenders for purchasing 'single phase Preventors with Automatic control' vide tender notices dated 11 -2 -1980 and 29 -2 -1980. It is alleged that in pursuance of those tender notices, the accused -non -petitioner No. 2 Shri K.K. Nayyar, who is the proprietor of firm Gomati Electric Company, Jaipur submitted his tender. Two others tenders were also received on, from M/s Krishna Engineering Work, Jaipur and other from M/s Rallonix, Jaipur. It is alleged that all these three tenders were signed by accused non -petitioner No. 2 Shri K.K. Nayyar. He did so in complicity and in connivance with accused -non -petitioner No. 1 Shri Baldeo Goswami in order to cause loss to the Government, so that these articles may be purchased at the higher rates. It is further alleged that these tenders were opened by accused -non -petitioner No. 1 Shri Baldeo Goswami on 18 -2 -1980 and 12 -3 -1980 in the presence of accused -non -petitioner No. 2 Shri K.K. Nayyar and the rates of M/s Gomati Electric Company were found to be lowest and, therefore, the rates given by M/s Gomati Electric Company were approved. It is alleged that by accepting the rates given by M/s Gomati Electric Company the Government was put to a loss of Rs. 1900/ -.

(3.) I have heard Miss Sumitra Sankhla, the learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the State and Mr. N.M. Lodha, learned Counsel for non -petitioner No. 1. No body has appeared on behalf of non -petitioner No. 2 Shri K.K. Nayyar despite service of notice. I have carefully gone through the record of the case.