DAMODAR MISHRA Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND THROUGH VIGILANCE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Cr. Appeal 1393 of 2008 has been filed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 2.12.2008 passed by Special Judge (Vigilance), Ranchi in Special Case No. 10 of 1990 corresponding to Patna Sadar (Vig) Case No. 20 of 1990, whereby appellant was convicted under section 5(2) read with section 5(1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 substituted by section 13(2) read with section 13(1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and sentenced to under go R.I. for three years and also directed to pay fine of Rs. 10,000/- and in default further undergo simple imprisonment for 14 days.

(2.) Cr. Appeal No. 1393 of 2008

(3.) It appears that on the basis of aforesaid written report Patna Viglance P.S. Case No. 20 of 1990 under section 5(2) read with section 5(1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 substituted by section 13(2) read with section 13(1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 registered and investigating Officer (hereinafter referred as 1.0.) took up investigation, it then appears that on completion of investigation, charge sheet submitted against the appellant under section 5(2) read with section 5(1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 substituted by section 13(2) read with section 13(1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, it then appears that learned Special judge, took cognizance of the aforesaid offences. Thereafter the charges under section 5(2) read with section 5(1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 substituted by section 13(2) read with section 13(1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, was framed. The record further reveals that prosecution examined altogether 12 witnesses. After the close of case of prosecution, appellant was examined under section 313 of the Cr. P.C. in which his defence is of total denial. Appellant also examined 12 witnesses in his defence.