KAILASH PASWAN Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both the criminal appeals arising out of the same judgment were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.

(2.) The aforesaid two appeals are directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 26.7.2005 passed in R.C. No. 15(A) of 2002 (R) whereby both the appellants were found guilty for the offences under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act read with Section 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code and also under Section 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and each of the appellant was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 1 and 1/2 years under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act read with Section 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code and to pay a fine of Rs.4000/- with default clause.Further they were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 2 and 1/2 years under Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and to pay a fine of Rs.6000/- with default clause.

(3.) The case of the prosecution is that the complainant, Khaliluddin (P.W.7) had retired in September, 2001 as Mechanical Fitter from Bhurkunda Colliery, a unit of Central Coalfield Limited. Since then, the matter relating to CMPF refund was pending at CMPF office, Ranchi. On 12.11.2002, the complainant met with the appellants, Kailash Paswan and Mohan Naik, both Upper Division Clerks, CMPF in their office at about 10 A.M. Both of them asked the complainant to pay Rs.1000/- as bribe so that CMPF refund be paid to him. In such eventuality, the complainant, Khaliluddin (P.W.7) filed a complaint (Ext.11) before the In-charge, S.P., C.B.I/S.P., Ranchi The then Incharge S.P., C.B.I directed S.N.Choudhary (P.W.8) to make verification of the allegation made by the complainant. The allegation on being verified, was found prima facie to be true and hence, he submitted verification report (Ext.12) to that effect. On submission of the verification report, an FIR was lodged (Ext.13) against both the appellants. The Inspector, K.K.Singh (P.W.9) took up the investigation.