SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2018 Supreme(Mad) 3205

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
A.D. Jagadish Chandira, J.
Kasinathan - Appellant
Vs.
State - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 37 of 2012
Decided On : 10-10-2018

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
C.R. Malarvanan, K. Srinivasan

Headnote:

PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION ACT, 1988 - SECTION 7 AND 13[2] READ WITH 13[1][D] - DEMAND AND ACCEPTANCE OF ILLEGAL GRATIFICATION - FOUNDATIONAL FACTS - BURDEN OF PROOF - EXPLANATION BY THE ACCUSED - STANDARD OF PROOF - SECTION 20 OF THE ACT - HELD, MERE RECOVERY OF MONEY IS NOT SUFFICIENT TO FASTEN THE GUILT OF THE ACCUSED AND IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY EVIDENCE REGARDING DEMAND AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE SAME AS ILLEGAL GRATIFICATION OF THE ACCUSED, THE ACCUSED IS ENTITLED TO ACQUITTAL.

Fact of the Case:

The appellant/accused was convicted for the offences u/s. 7 and 13[2] read with 13[1][d] of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, and was sentenced to undergo 3 years rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 5000/- and in default, to undergo 3 months rigorous imprisonment for the offence u/s.7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act and was sentenced to undergo 4 years rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 5000/- and in default, to undergo 4 months rigorous imprisonment for the offence u/s.13[2] read with 13[1][d] of the said Act. The charges levelled against the appellant/accused are that, while the appellant/accused was working as a Part Time Sweeper in Punjab National Bank, Tiruvambattu Branch, Villupuram District, on two occasions, viz., 29.10.2008 and 30.10.2008, demanded illegal gratification of a sum of Rs. 5000/- other than the legal remuneration, from the complainant [P.W.2] for obtaining the Educational Loan from the Bank and also accepted the same, by abusing his official position and misusing the office.

Finding of the Court:

The prosecution has not proved its case beyond reasonable doubt, in particular, the trial court has failed to consider the explanation offered in defence by the appellant/accused in its entirety. the trial Court has failed to take into consideration the facts regarding the official capacity of the accused and the alleged receiving of illegal gratification by abusing his official capacity and thereby the trial Court has erred in convicting and sentencing the appellant/accused based on the only evidence of P.W.2 without any corroboration.

Issues: Whether the prosecution has proved its case beyond all reasonable doubt? Whether the explanation offered by the appellant/accused as his defence, is sufficient to rebut the presumption u/s.20 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988?

Ratio Decidendi: Mere recovery of money is not sufficient to fasten the guilt of the accused and in the absence of any evidence regarding demand and acceptance of the same as illegal gratification of the accused, the accused is entitled to acquittal. The standard of burden of proof on the appellant/accused is lesser than the standard of burden of proof by the prosecution. Though it is wanton upon the prosecution to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt, the appellant/accused can prove his case by mere preponderance of probabilities and that, he is not expected to prove his case as that is required by the prosecution.

Final Decision: The criminal appeal is allowed and the conviction and sentence imposed on the appellant/accused in the impugned judgment dated 11.01.2012 made in CC.No.5/2009 on the file of the learned XIII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Chennai, are set aside. He is acquitted of all charges leveled against him. Fine amounts, if any paid, shall be refunded to him.

JUDGMENT :

A.D. Jagadish Chandira, J.

Challenge has been made by the appellant/accused to the judgment of the learned XIII Additional Sessions Judge (Special Judge fro CBI Cases), City Civil Court, Chennai, in C.C.No.5 of 2009 dated 11.01.2012, in and by which, he was convicted for the offences u/s. 7 and 13[2] read with 13[1][d] of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, and was sentenced to undergo 3 years rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 5000/- and in default, to undergo 3 months rigorous imprisonment for the offence u/s.7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act and was sentenced to undergo 4 years rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 5000/- and in default, to undergo 4 months rigorous imprisonment for the offence u/s.13[2] read with 13[1][d] of the said Act. The sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

2. The charges levelled against the appellant/accused are that, while the appellant/accused was working as a Part Time Sweeper in Punjab National Bank, Tiruvambattu Branch, Villupuram District, on two occasions, viz., 29.10.2008 and 30.10.2008, demanded illegal gratification of a sum of Rs. 5000/- other than the legal remuneration, from the complainant [P.W.2] for obtaining the Educational Loan from the Bank and also accepted the same, by abusing his official position and misusing the office.

3. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is as follows:-

[a] P.W.2-Subramanian, was a lorry driver by profession. He had deposed that he approached the Manager, Punjab National Bank, Tiruvambattu Branch, for availing Educational Loan for his son who was studying in an Engineering College at the relevant time and also submitted an Application [Ex.P.3]. The Manager [P.W.4] asked P.W.2 to furnish the Community Certificate as well as the Xerox Copy of the Ration/Family Card. P.W.2 furnished the documents, viz., XII Standard Transfer Certificate [Ex.P.4] ; Provisional Allotment given by the Anna University [Ex.P.5] ; Conduct Certificate [Ex.P.6] ; Estimate Statement [Ex.P.7] ; 12th Standard Mark List [Ex.P.8] ; 10th Standard Mark Sheet [Ex.P.9] ; Ration Card pertaining to the year 2005-2006 [Ex.P.10] ; Community Certificate [Ex.P.11] ; Residential Certificate [Ex.P.12] ; and Voters' Identity Card [Ex.P.13] along with the Loan Application. After receipt of the application and the documents and the signature of P.W.2, P.W.4 asked P.W.2 to meet him after 15 days. When P.W.2 approached P.W.4 after 15 days, P.W.4 had informed that he had received any Sanction order from the Head Office and that he was again asked to approach P.W.4 after 15 days. Once again, when P.W.2 went to meet P.W4, the appellant/accused asked him to wait since P.W.4 was attending to some work. After some time, the appellant/accused demanded a sum of Rs. 5000/- from P.W.2 by stating that he would obtain the sanction order from the Head Office. On the same day night, at about 8.00 p.m., P.W.2 informed the CBI Officials over phone about the demand made by the appellant/accused. They enquired him as to his name and address and also the reason for demanding such amount. P.W.2 narrated the happenings. The officials had informed him that they would come and enquire about the same on the next day. On the next day, the officials came to the residence of P.W.2 and enquired him. P.W.2 furnished all the relevant documents to them. On 30.10.2008 he had also given a written complaint to them. The said complaint is marked as Ex.P.14. When the officials asked P.W.2 as to whether he had got the amount as demanded by the appellant/accused, P.W.2 informed that he is having Rs. 5000/- with him [Rs.500/- notes-7 Nos ; Rs. 100/- notes-15 Nos]. The officials smeared phenolphthalein powder on the currency notes. The official by name Thiru Babu kept the money inside the shirt pocket of P.W.2 and asked P.W.2 not to take it out unless and until the appellant/accused demands the same. On the same day, at about 12.45 p.m., P.W.2 and one Kumar [trap witness] were made to alight the ca





































































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top