Prashant Kumar, J. — This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 27.5.2002 and 28.5.2002 respectively passed by Special Judge, C.B.I. & Vigilance-cum-1st Additional Sessions Judge, Dhanbad in Special Case No.4 of 1993 corresponding to Patna Nigrani P .S. Case No.4 of 1993, whereby and whereunder appellant was convicted under Section 13(1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and directed to pay fine of Rs. 1,000/-. In default of payment of fine, he was directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two months.

2. It appears that P.W.-1 filed a written report before the Officer-in-charge, Nigrani Police Station alleging therein that during the check period 1973-1983 appellant was posted at Digwadih, Dhanbad as Meter Reader under the Bihar State Electricity Board and during that period he by misusing his position had accumulated and possessed properties disproportionate to his known source of income. It is further alleged that during the check period i.e. 1973-1 S83, appellant purchased 3.5 khatas of land at Dhanbad, in the name of his wife Smt. Sonamati Devi, on the payment of Rs. 7,000/-, without obtaining permission from the competent authority. It is further alleged that thereafter he constructed a double storied building on the said land during the check period by spending an amount of Rs. 1,31,813/-. It is stated that during the check period, appellant earned Rs. 71,149.94 from his salary and bonus. After deducting his expenses, his estimated savings comes to Rs. 23,716.49. Thus. deducting the aforesaid savings from the total value of the land and building i.e. Rs. 1,38,813/-, the disproportionate income comes to Rs. 1,15,097/-, for which the appellant has not furnished any explanation. Thus, appellant has committed criminal misconduct under Section 5(1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred as 'Act of 1947') read with Section 13(1)(e) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred as 'Act of 1988').

3. On the basis of aforesaid written report, Nigrani Police Station, Patna instituted a case bearing Nigrani P.S. Case No. 4 of 1993 and took up investigation. After investigation, charge-sheet submitted in the Court of Special Judge, who, accordingly, took cognizance against the appellant under Section 5(2) read with Section 5(1)(e) of the Act of 1947 as amended by Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(e) of the Act of 1988. It appears that learned Special Judge vide order dated 12.1.1998 framed charge against the appellant under Section 13(1)(e) of the Act of 1988 and explained the same to the appellant, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. Thereafter, prosecution examined altogether nine witnesses in support of its case. Prosecution also brought on record Ext.-1-written report, Ext.-2-report• of expert who made valuation of the building in question, Ext.-3-the forwarding report of the expert, Ext.-4-the signature of sanctioning authority and Ext.-5-the sanction order.

4. After close of the case of prosecution, the statement of appellant recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C., in which his defence is that he was working in the Bihar State Electricity Board from 1961, in spite of that prosecuting agencies had not added his savings from the salaries etc. from 1961-1972 in his income from known source of income. He further took defence that in spite of the information given to the prosecuting agencies his income from agriculture has not been taken into account. The appellant had further taken defence that if his savings from salaries etc. w.e.f. 1961-1983 and agriculture income were taken into account, the construction of the said building on the land in question is not disproportionate to his known source of income: Learned Special Judge, after considering the evidence on record, concluded that appellant possessed properties disproportionate to his known so