IMPORTANT POINT
Under Section 5(2) of PC Act the court is empowered to impose imprisonment of less than one year for special reasons.

JUDGMENT :

Abhay Manohar Sapre, J.

1. This appeal is filed against the final judgment and order dated 14.05.2009 passed by the High Court of Uttarakhand at Nainital in Criminal Appeal No. 258 of 2001 (Old No.1518/1991) whereby the High Court partly allowed the appeal filed by the appellant herein.

2. A few facts need mention to appreciate the short controversy involved in this appeal.

3. The appellant was working as "Kanoongo/Patwari" at Didihat, Uttarakhand. He was prosecuted for commission of the offences punishable under Section 5 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as “the PC Act”) read with Section 161 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860(hereinafter referred to as “IPC”).

4. The charge against the appellant was that he assured one Gopal Singh that he would not arrest him nor would implicate him in one pending criminal case, if he pays him Rs.1200/-.

5. It was the case of the prosecution that the appellant while accepting the illegal gratification of Rs.1200/- from Gopal Singh on 30.09.1985 was caught by S.P. (Vigilance) in a trap arranged for this purpose at the behest of Gopal Singh.

6. The Sessions Judge, Pithoragarh, by order dated 05.08.1991, found the case of the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt and accordingly convicted the appellant for the offences punishable under Section 5 (2) of the PC Act read with Section 161 IPC and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of four years and to pay a fine of Rs.5000/- under Section 5(2) of the PC Act and in default of payment of fine, to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years under Section 161 IPC. Both the sentences were to run concurrently.

7. The appellant felt aggrieved by his conviction and sentence and filed an appeal in the High Court. By impugned order, the High Court partly allowed the appeal. The High Court maintained the conviction insofar as it pertains to the offence punishable under Section 5(2) of the PC Act but interfered in quantum of sentence awarded and accordingly reduced the jail sentence from four years to one year and in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months. So far as the offence punishable under Section 161 IPC is concerned, the High Court upheld the conviction but reduced the sentence from three years to one year. Both the sentences were to run concurrently.

8. The appellant(accused) felt aggrieved and has filed this appeal by way of special leave in this Court.

9. Heard Mr. Arun K. Sinha, learned counsel for the appellant (accused) and Mr. Ashutosh Kumar Sharma, learned counsel for the respondent (State).

10. Learned counsel for the appellant (accused) has argued only one point. He did not question the legality of the conviction. All that he argued was that the jail sentence awarded to the appellant be reduced.

11. According to him, having regard to the fact that the appellant is now aged around 78 years and suffering from heart ailment and further the incident is of the year 1985 and, in the meantime, 34 years have elapsed and lastly, the appellant has undergone around one month and 10 days imprisonment, this Court should exercise its powers under proviso to Section 5 (2) of the PC Act and reduce the jail sentence from one year to what is undergone by the appellant, i.e., 1 month and 10 days as his total jail sentence and may, if considered proper, instead enhance the fine amount.

12. Learned counsel for the respondent, in reply, supported the impugned order and contended that having regard to the factual circumstances, no case of further reduction in the sentence awarded by the High Court is made out and, therefore, the appeal is liable to be dismissed.

13. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the record of the case, we are inclined to allow the appeal in part and reduce the sentence as indicated below.

14. Section 5 (2) of the PC Act reads