S. L. Goswami vs State Of M. P. - 1972 Supreme(SC) 3

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

1972 Supreme(SC) 3

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
P. JAGANMOHAN REDDY AND D.G. PALEKAR, JJ.
Dr. S. L. Goswami, Appellant
Versus
The State of M.P., Respondent.
Criminal Appeal No. 69 of 1969, D/- 4-1-1972.
Advocates appeared
Mr. A. S. R. Chari, Senior Advocate (Mr. R. Nagaratnam, Advocate, M/s. S. K. Mehta and K. L. Mehta. 717 Advocates of M/s. K. L. Mehta and Co. and Mr. K. R. Nagaraja, Advocate, with him), for Appellant; M/s. I. N. Shroff and M. N. Shroff, Advocates, for Respondent.

Headnote:
Indian Penal Code,1860 - Sections 409 and 420 - Prevention of Corruption Act,1988 - Sections 5(1),(2),(d) - Cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property – Appeal Against Conviction - Employed in Medical College with permission of Government of Madhya Pradesh given on December accepted a grant-in-aid for carrying out a research project entitled Study of Manganese in Health and Disease by Neutron Activation Analysis This Research Project was to be carried on in collaboration with Atomic Energy Commission of Government of India for three years - Appellant began his research work in July and sometime thereafter on September an instrument for distillation of water known as Stadler Still Double Distillation Apparatus was purchased from Messrs & Company of Calcutta - A firm of scientific instruments manufacturers and dealers of Calcutta for - Whether he could supply distillation plant as per specifications given by him - Whether accused as alleged by prosecution did not buy another apparatus for which he had received a draft from I.C.M.R - Whether they could supply apparatus as per specifications - Whether accused purchased apparatus in Bombay with money he got under draft issued by I.C.M.R in favour of Messrs - Whether amount received back by appellant from Messrs - Whether asked you to sign thereon or not? Whether she saw distillation apparatus before she was deputed to Hypoxia Enquiry and her answer was that she does not remember and then said whether there was any monogram on that apparatus and claims that she can identify if two or three apparatus of same type are kept because of their being old or new - Whether she kept a note of it anywhere in respect of breakage or was speaking from memory whether type of stadler still supplied by them was available in Bombay market whether they were supplied to M/s. M. B. Corporation Nagar Niwas C. P Tank Road for sale whether somebody from their firm could identify apparatus supplied to Medical College - Whether in fact appellant had purchased double distillation apparatus - Held, Court have already seen that what was purchased from Biswas & Company was a stadler still quickfit type of double distillation automatic with special type clamp But there is nothing to show from that it was for a litre capacity - Nor is there any other evidence as fairly admitted by advocate for prosecution from which Court can ascertain what was capacity of that apparatus or that of Article A - This would leave a lacuna in prosecution case and probabilise appellant s contention that apparatus Article A is not same as that purchased earlier for Atomic Energy Commission but is the one which he purchased in Bombay in - Court refer to your telephonic talk and have to inform you that Court are you that Court are out of stock of above cited item but other party is having who is coming with this letter to you with Apparatus if it serves your purpose you may buy same directly from him against cost for nett Only - Court are really sorry to learn from your phone message that you are not keeping well and hope you will be all right very soon - Court have no hesitation in holding that accused in innocent - Appeal is allowed and convictions and sentences in respect of several offences are set aside - Bail bond will be cancelled - Fine if paid will be refunded - Appeal allowed

Judgment

P. JAGANMOHAN REDDY, J. :- The appellant who was Professor and Head of the Department of Pharmacology ad Therapeutics in the Medical College, Jabalpur, has been convicted by the Special Judge, Jabalpur under Section 5 (1) (d) read with Section 5 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act to one year s rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1,000/- and is default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months. He was further convicted of offences under Sections 409 and 420. I.P.C. and was awarded sentences of six months rigorous imprisonment in respect of each of them. All the sentences were directed to run concurrently. An appeal against this conviction and sentence to the High Court of Madhya Pradesh was dismissed. This appeal is by special leave.

2. Shortly stated the case of the prosecution is that the appellant who was employed in the Medical College, Jabalpur, with the permission of the Government of Madhya Pradesh given on December 20, 1962, accepted a grant-in-aid for carrying out a research project entitled "Study of Manganese in Health and Disease by Neutron Activation Analysis". This Research Project was to be carried on in collaboration with the Atomic Energy Commission of the Government of India for three years 1963-64, 1964-65 and 1965-66. The appellant began his research work in July 1963 and sometime thereafter on September 30, 1964, an instrument for distillation of water known as the Stadler Still Double Distillation Apparatus was purchased from Messrs S. K. Biswas & Company of Calcutta - a firm of scientific instruments manufacturers and dealers of Calcutta, for Rs. 450/-. On April 11, 1964, the Indian Council of Medical Research known as the I.C.M.R. entrusted him with the research project on "Effect of Hypoxi and Decompression on Body Temperature as function of Adaptation to Hypoxia at various altitude." The terms and conditions of grant-in-aid were mentioned in the circular letter Ext. P-32 dated April 11, 1964, and were current for the years 1965-66 and 1966-67. For this project the appellant wanted to purchase another double distillation apparatus and after inquiry from several firms placed an order with Messrs. Goverdhandas Desai Private Ltd., Bombay (hereinafter called Messrs. Goverdhandas ) as per Ext. P-5 dated February 20, 1965 for a double distillation apparatus, horizontal type, Double Stage, capacity 10 liters Pyrex glass for Rs. 890/- and asked them to inform him for their acceptance telegraphically and sent triplicate bills in advance. Messrs. Goverdhandas sent wire Ext. P-6 and the advance bills Exts. P-8, P-9 and P-10 to the appellant on March 3, 1965. This apparatus was entered in the stock register of the I.C.M.R. Hypoxia Enquiry as per Ext. P-44 in accordance with the details shown in the bills and the triplicate bills for Rs. 969-10 inclusive of sales-tax and packing and freight charges were presented for payment. It may be mentioned at this stage that the appellant was on leave from February 9, 1965to March 20, 1965 because of heart trouble and the inquiry and the order were placed during that period. A draft in favour of Messrs. Goverdhandas was subsequently issued by the Accounts Officer, I.C.M.R. and was received by the appellant on April 12, 1965. On the same day the appellant wrote a letter Ext. P-16 to Messrs. Goverdhandas saying that he did not want the apparatus as shown in the sketch sent by them but wanted it according to the original order placed by him. He therefore requested them to expedite the order urgently as he had received the payment against the bills and was withholding the same for want of apparatus. As the firm was not able to supply the apparatus as per the specifications the order was cancelled by letter Ext. P-17 dated April, 24, 1965. Thereafter the appellant was in Bombay between May 15, 1965 and May 25, 1965 where he had gone for a medical check-up and was staying in the ML As. Rest House. On May 17, 1965, he met Mr. Patel a Director of Messrs Goverd

Click Here to Read the rest of this document