JUDGMENT

BHAGWATI, C, J.:— I agree with the Judgment about to be delivered by my learned brother Ranganath Misra, but there are some two or three charges in-regard to which I should like to make more detailed observations since they have not been dealt with fully by my learned brother and he has left it to me to consider them in some detail. Since the genesis of this appeal has been set out by my learned brother at length I do not propose to repeat what has been so ably said by him and I will confine myself only to the facts relating to the charges which are going to be dealt with by me. But I may be permitted to say a few words in regard to two points which have been discussed by my learned brother in his judgment since they are of some importance and can without impropriety bear further discussion.

2. The first point arises out of a contention raised by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the first respondent (hereinafter referred to as the respondent) that the presumption under S. 4 of the Prevention of Corruption Act 1947 applies only after a charge is framed against an accused and has no application at the stage when the court is considering the question whether a charge