Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1968 (10) TMI 115

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ial functions, namely, for making arrangements to accept the re-tender submitted by P.W. 1, by the office of the District Medical Officer, Thanjavur at Nagapattinam. 3. The prosecution case is briefly this : The appellant, during the relevant period was a Lover Division Clerk attached to the Government Hospital, Mannargudi. One of his duties was to attend to the tenders submitted by the contractors for supply of materials to the Government Hospital. P.W. 1, Panchamurthy, who is a resident of Mannargudi submitted a tender for the supply of certain diet articles to the Government Hospital for the year 1966-67 in the name of his father as his father on previous occasions was supplying diet articles to the Hospital. He got a communication at .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... er was rejected. So-saying, the appellant asked him to pay ₹ 30 for his share on the next day while he returned from the office to his house in the evening or on the morning of the next day and that a sum of ₹ 20 also should be paid as the share of the Head Clerk of the Office of the District Medical Officer, Nagapattinam, saying that the said sum could be paid later. P.W. 1 agreed to pay ₹ 30 the next day while the appellant, returned from the Hospital to his house in the evening as suggested by the appellant as he was afraid that the appellant would do harm to him. However, he thought over the matter and decided to report to the Vigilance Police in charge of Anti-Corruption. On the morning of 22nd April, 1966, P.W. 1 con .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ceeded ten yards from the Hospital gate, the appellant asked for the money. P.W. 1 gave M.Os. 1 to 3, three ten rupees notes to the appellant. The appellant received them and kept them in the left pocket of his shirt. Thereafter P.W. 1 signalled to P.W. 5 who was standing at a distance of 20 yards. Immediately, P.W. 5 along with P.W. 2 rushed to the appellant and asked him to produce the amount received by him from P.W. 1. The appellant produced the notes from his pocket. On comparison, the notes recovered from the appellant were found to be the same notes, the numbers of which were noted in a mahazar. 4. When questioned under Section 342, Criminal Procedure Code, the appellant admitted having received money from P.W. 1, but stated that .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... . 1 gave ₹ 30 as taxi charges to go to Nagapattinam to find out the details from the Head Office. The appellant is a public servant. P.W. 1 does not seem to be his friend. In these circumstances, it is curious that the appellant would have accepted to go to Nagapattinam merely to oblige him without receiving a gratification for the favourable arrangements to be made for accepting the tender of P.W. 1 by the Head Office. No motive has been suggested to P.W. 1 as to why he should be a party in laying a trap when especially according to the appellant, he was prepared to oblige him. I accept the case of the prosecution that the appellant received ₹ 30 as illegal gratification for having put up a favourable note recommending the tend .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 948Mad63 , on a similar contention raised, held that the term reward in Section 161, Indian Penal Code, was manifestly intended to apply to a past service and that any other construction would lead to an absurdity. I respectfully agree with this decision. I do not, therefore, see any force in the contention of the learned Counsel. The convictions of the appellant under Section 161, Indian Penal Code, and Section 5(2) read with Section 5(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act are confirmed. 7. So far, as the sentence is concerned, I am inclined to take a lenient view. The appellant is a middle-aged man who was getting a very meagre salary as a Clerk at the time he committed the offence. He has lost his job. He has been in jail for a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates