( 2 ) THE appellant was convicted under S. 5 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 (Central Act II of 1947), hereinafter referred to as the Act, and under S. 161 of the Indian Penal Code by a Special Judge who sentenced him under S. 161 to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months and to pay a fine of Rs. 500 in default to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for one month. No separate sentence was passed under S. 5 (2) of the Act. He unsuccessfully appealed to the High Court against his conviction and sentence.

( 3 ) THE charges framed against the appellant under S. 161 of the Indian Penal Code, in sub-stance, stated that on or about 12-5-1952, he had accepted Rs. 100 as illegal gratification from V. S. Doraiswamy as a motive or reward for doing an official act and showing in the exercise of his official functions favour to Doraiswamy in seeing that a speedy and favourable settlement of the claim cases preferred by him against the Bengal Nagpur Railway, subsequently the Eastern Railway. The charge under S. 5 (2) of the Act which related to the same transaction stated that the appellant had accepted the aforesaid sum of Rs. 100 by corrupt or illegal means or by otherwise abusing his position as a public servant.

( 4 ) IT is unnecessary to set out in any great details the story of the prosecution as to how Doraiswamy and the appellant came into contact and how the process of giving bribe to the appellant began. They met in 1950. Rs. 10 was paid to the appellant in October, 1951 and Rs. 1 5/01/1952 as the result of the appellant asking Doraiswamy for some grantification for speedy and favourable disposal of his claim cases. The appellant was at that time Assistant Supervisor of Claim Cases of the Bengal Nagpur Railway of the Vizianagram Section. On some secret information, the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Special Police Establishment at Puri directed Inspector G. N. Brahma to contact Doraiswamy in connection with a report of alleged dishonesty by railway officials. Brahma met Doraiswamy and asked him to meet him again at Calcutta on 10-5-1952, after the latter had filed a complaint along with some letters said to have been written by the appellant. Permission was obtained from the Chief Presidency Magistrate, Calcutta to investigate the case. Thereafter Doraiswamy met the appellant in Calcutta and it was settled that the former would pay the latter Rs. 100 on 12-5-1952, at 6 p. m. at the India Coffee House. Doraiswamy informed the police of the arrangement. Marked ten-rupee currency notes were given to Doraiswamy. The appellant and Doraiswamy met at the India Coffee House as arranged. There was a talk between them about expediting the claim cases which were being dealt with by the appellant and a list of them was given to him. This list and the bundle of marked currency notes which Doraiswamy gave him were put in the left upper pocket of his shirt by the appellant. The Inspectors H. K. Mukherjee and S. B. Mitra along with G. N. Ghosh, an Assistant Director of Postal Services and Brahma came up to the appellant. He was accused by the police of having received 10 ten-rupee currency notes as bribe from Doraiswamy and was asked to produce them. After some hesitation the appellant produced the currency notes as well as the list given to him by Doraiswamy. The number of the currency notes were checked and found to tally with the previously noted numbers of the currency notes given to Doraiswamy for handing them over to the appellant. The case of the prosecution was found to have been proved by both the courts below and the appellant was convicted and sentenced as stated above. ( 5 ) IT may be stated at the outset that the current findings of fact arrived at by the courts below were not questioned before us. The only question canvassed before us was whether there had been a valid sanction given under S. 6 of the Act without which no court could take cognizance of the offences alleged to have been committed by the appel

Click Here to Read the rest of this document