Rajiv Sharma, J.

Since all the appeals arise from the same judgment and common questions of law and facts are involved, all the appeals were taken up together for hearing and are being disposed of by this common judgment.

2. The present appeals have been instituted against Judgment dated 30.6.2011 rendered by the learned Sessions Judge (Special Judge), Shimla in Sessions Trial CC No. 3-S/7 of 2006, whereby appellants-accused (hereinafter referred to as 'accused' for convenience sake), who were charged with and tried for offences punishable under Sections 420, 409 and 120-B IPC and Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, have been convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year each and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- each under Sections 420, 120-B IPC and Section 13 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, and, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo simple imprisonment for two months each. Substantive sentence of imprisonment were ordered to run concurrently.

3. Case of the prosecution, in a nutshell, is that Rajesh Gupta and V.S. Mehta were working as Divisional Manager and Administrative Officer in the United