K. Ramakrishnan, J.

1. Criminal Appeal No. 907/2001 was filed by accused Nos. 1 and 2 and Criminal Appeal No. 908/2001 was filed by the 3rd accused in C.C. No. 18/2009 on the file of the Enquiry Commissioner and Special Judge, Kozhikode. Appellants along with original 4th accused were charge-sheeted by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vigilance and Anti Corruption Bureau, Palakkad, in V.C. 8/94 of VACB Palakkad, alleging offences under Section 13(1)(d) and 13(1)(c) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and Sections 403 and 120B of Indian Penal Code.

2. The case of the prosecution in nutshell was that, accused Nos. 1 and 2 were the president and member respectively of Pudunagaram Grama Panchayath, Palakkad, during 1991 and 92 and while so under the JRY Scheme, the Panchayath was accorded sanction to undertake the work namely improvement to Unnanchathan Theruvu-Kattutheruvu road, on an estimated cost of Rs.1,30,700 and third accused was selected as a convener for the work and as per the norms of the scheme, the work has to be done by the convener with the help of the local people and it cannot be done through any contractor and more than 50% of the advance amount should not be given, unless for the amount advanced, certification from the Assistant Engineer of the Block Supervising the work is obtained and produced along with the part bill for the work done. But accused Nos. 1 and 2 entered into a conspiracy with third accused, the convener of the work and 4th accused the contractor engaged by him to misappropriate the funds earmarked for the work and pursuant to the conspiracy and violating the norms for payment of the advance, paid ` 88,000 to the third accused by way of five installments and in spite of the amount given, the work was not completed and thereby accused Nos. 1 and 2 have misusing the their official position with a dishonest intention of causing loss to the Panchayath and with a view to help accused Nos. 3 and 4 done these things, violating the rules and regulations and thereby misappropriated the amount to the tune of Rs.56,075 and thereby accused Nos. 1 and 2 have committed the offence punishable under Section 13(1)(c) and (d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and all the accused have committed the offence punishable under Sections 120B and 409 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. After investigation, final report was filed and the case was taken on file as C.C. No. 18/1999 on the file of the Enquiry Commissioner and Special Judge, Kozhikode. When the accused appeared before the court below, after hearing both sides, originally charge under Section 13(1)(d)read with Section 13(2) and Sections 120B and 403 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code was framed against accused Nos. 1 and 2 and charge under Sections 403 and 120B of Indian Penal Code was framed against accused Nos. 3 and 4 along with accused Nos. 1 and 2 and the same was read over and explained to them and they pleaded not guilty. Thereafter, since the Special Judge found that offence under Section 13(1)(c) of the Prevention of Corruption Act was also committed, the charge was amended including Section 13(1)(c) of the above Act also against accused Nos. 1 and 2 and the same was also read over and explained to them and they pleaded not guilty.

4. In order to prove the case of the prosecution, P.Ws. 1 to 20 were examined and Exts. P-1 to P-32 were marked on their side. After closure of the prosecution evidence, the accused were questioned under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and they denied all the incriminating circumstances brought against them in the prosecution evidence. First accused has filed a statement under Section 313(5) of the Code of Criminal Procedure stating that, he had not committed any offence and as per the request of the local people of the panchayath, Unnanchathan Theruvu-Kattutheruvu road work was included in the JRY Scheme and Sri Shaik Musthafa, a