KAILASH CHAND KAUSHIK Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal filed by the accused -appellant against the judgment of Special Judge, ACD Cases, Jaipur dated 27 -1 -1981 by which he convicted the accused -appellant of offence under Sections 161 IPC and Sec 5(1)(d) read with Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act (here in after referred to as 'the Act') and sentenced for each of the offence to one year's RI and a fine of Rs. 300/ - and in default of payment of fine to further undergo three month's RI.

(2.) THE learned Judge, how ever, ordered that the substantive sentences pasted under both the offences shall run concurrently.

(3.) INVESTIGATION was conducted and during investigation several record of the Patwarghar was seized. Copy of the Girdawari, which is alleged to have been issued to the decoy, was also produced. It was also the case of the prosecution that at the time when Dy. SP had entered the office accused Kailash Chand had passed ever an application purported to Lave been given by Rokarchand to him for issuance of copy to one Hanuman Sahai who, in turn turned it off and threw the pieces on the ground. After completion of investigation and obtaining sanction for prosecution, a charge sheet was, submitted against the accused -appellant in the Court of Special Judge, ACD. A charge was framed against him to which he denied and claimed and to be tried Prosecution, therefore, examined 12 witnesses in support of its case Accused denied the occurrence as alleged by the prosecution. His case is that Kamla had been cultivating the land, and, therefore, there was an entry in her name in Khara Girdawari and registers, from before his taking over as Patwari of the circle. He states that the copy of the Girdawari had already been taken long back by decoy after putting his signatures in Ghatna Bahi. His case is that he has returned a sum of Rs 50/ - which was as a repayment of part of the loan he had taken from Rokair Chand. He has stated that story of 10 -10 -1976 regarding payment of bribe is a fake story as he had gone to a different village on that day. His case is that decoy suspected that be was having illicit relations with decoy's sister Kamla, hence he was annoyed with him and also that he wanted his name to be inserted in place of Kamla in the Gast -Girdawari and since accused refused to do it, he made a plan and, obviously, implicated him in this case by inventing a story. He also examined Hanuman Sahai (PW 1) and Kanhaiya Lal (DW 2) as his witnesses.