JUDGMENT

S. RATNAVEL PANDIAN, J.:- The Criminal Appeal No. 631/ 90 is directed by the two appellants namely, K. T. S. Mohammed and M. Jamal Mohamed and Criminal Appeal No. 632/ 90 is directed by Amanullah Quareshi. All the three appellants are challenging the correctness of the common order made by the High Court of Madras in Criminal Revision Cases Nos. 229/81 and 239/81 respectively dismissing the revisions and confirming the judgment of the lower appellate Court made in Cr.A. Nos. 221 and 222 of 1980 which in turn affirmed the judgment of the trial Court convicting and sentencing the appellants under the provisions of the Indian Penal Code and the Income-tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the I.-T. Act).

2. The facts leading to the prosecution case are well set out in the judgments of the Courts below. Nevertheless, we think it necessary to recapitulate the basic matrix, though not in details, in order to enable us to give our own reasons for the findings which we will be arriving at.

3. The first appellant who is the brother-in-law of the second appellant received a cash of Rs. 6 lakhs, brought by a person from Bombay for distributing the said amount to various persons as per the