JUDGMENT - M. F. SALDANHA, J.:---The appellant in this case, a senior retired Railway clerk, came to be charge-sheeted by the Central Bureau of Investigation in Special Case No. 27 of 1978 along with four of his colleagues. The five accused stood charged with having committed an offence of conspiracy punishable under section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code. The learned Special Judge, Bombay, framed as many as 12 charges, some of them relating to abuse of position and securing gain, being offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act; charges relating to cheating of the Western Railway as also offences relating to fabrication of records. The charges are being summarily dealt with by me because on a prime facie scrutiny of the 12 charges, it is noticed that several of these charges were wholly unnecessary in so far as there is a repetition of the same charges which are all overlapping. There are reasons, however, why the technical errors or procedural errors involved in this case, though of consequence and being ones of a substantial nature, are not the only heads that are being considered because, to my mind the consequences of this prosecution being extremely serious and far-reaching to the concerned employees, it is essential that the case be dealt with also on merits so that a complete and final decision can be arrived at.

2. Briefly stated, the prosecution alleged that between the period October 1973 and December 1975, the five accused persons who had dealt with the refunds in relation to unused or partially used tickets had entered into a criminal conspiracy, the object of which was to secure for themselves pecuniary gain misuse of their positions. It was alleged that accused No. 1 was the sanctioning authority and the four accused were clerks in his department dealing with issues relating to these refunds and that in certain cases though refunds were, in fact, shown that the amounts did not reach the passengers. Unfortunately, though the record of the case is voluminous and though a prestigious investigating authority, such as the Central Bureau of Investigation, was entrusted with the investigation of this case, I am constrained to observe that the combined efforts of the C.B.I. and the Railway have only succeeded in making a mountain out of a mole-hill. After the immense labour which the investigating authority seems to have gone through, the charge which emerges is that accused No. 2 was responsible for an amount totalling only Rs. 408-36 ps. Accused No. 3 was responsible for an amount of Rs. 303-20 ps. Accused No. 4 was responsible for an amount of Rs. 223-10 ps. and accused No. 5 was responsible for an even more insignificant amount of Rs. 60-50 ps. For this trivial amount aggregating hardly to a thousand rupees, the Railways instead of so much as holding an enquiry of their own which if held, would have demonstrated that there was virtually no case against the five employees, took the easy way out of lodging a complaint with the C.B.I. This authority, in its turn, adopted its favourite modus operandi of starting with a conspiracy charge and alleging that everything that took place was in furtherance of that conspiracy. The learned Special Judge has, after a protracted trial, come to the conclusion that accused No. 1 was entitled to an acquittal; whereas accused Nos. 2 to 5 have been convicted under almost all the charges except charge No. 12 which related to fabrication of documents. It is true that the learned Special Judge has taken a lenient view and has imposed very light sentences and fines in this case. As far as this appellant is concerned, after 38 years of service with the Railways as a clerk, the man had retired from service, at which time faced with a prosecution of the present type he appears to have suffered a nervous breakdown and landed in the Mental Hospital for treatment. At the time when the judgement was pronounced, therefore, his case was separated and after his discharge from the Mental Hos

Click Here to Read the rest of this document