GAJANAN S/O. LOBHAJI DAHALE Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
LAWS(BOM)-2017-8-103
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY (AT: NAGPUR)
Decided on August 10,2017

Gajanan S/O. Lobhaji Dahale Appellant
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

ROHIT B.DEO,J. - (1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 25-02-2002 in Special Case 9/1998 delivered by the learned Special Judge, Pusad, convicting the appellant (hereinafter referred to as the "accused") for the offence punishable under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as the 2 apeal135.02 "Act") and the offence punishable under Section 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the said Act. The accused is sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years in addition to payment of fine of Rs.1,000/- for each of the offences, the sentence is, however, to run concurrently.
(2.) The prosecution case, as is culled out from the complaint lodged by Harish Jadhav dated 07-06-1993 is that the complainant was working as tracer in the office of Public Works Department, Division-2, Amravati till 20-06-1992. He was transferred to the office of the Public Works Department, Sub-Division Darwha by order dated 05-06-1992 and was relieved on 20-06-1992. The complainant felt ill and could not join duties immediately. He recovered from illness and joined duties at the office of Public Works Department, Sub-Division Darwha on 03-09-1992. However, one Shri C.V. Tarolkar in whose place the complainant was posted had obtained a stay to the transfer order with the result that both the complainant and C.V. Tarolkar were working at the said office. Since two posts were not sanctioned, the complainant was transfered to the office of Public Works Circle, Yavatmal, pursuant to which transfer order, the complainant joined duties in the office of Public Works Circle at Yavatmal on 16-11-1992. 3 apeal135.02
(3.) It is the case of the prosecution that on 19-09-1992 the complainant submitted an application to the Executive Engineer, Public Works Department, Pusad requesting that his salary for the period of posting at Darwha be released. According to the complainant, he submitted another application on 16-10-1992 making a similar request. The complainant claims to have met the accused sometime in April 1993 at the office of the Public Works Circle at Yavatmal in the presence of Shri C.V. Tarolkar. a senior clerk in the said offence. The complaint claims that the accused was requested by the complainant to get the complainant's sick leave sanctioned and to release the salary. The accused avoided the issue. The oral report further states that vide letter dated 26-2-1993 the Superintending Engineer, Public Works Circle, Yavatmal had informed the Executive Engineer, Public Works Department, Pusad that the sick leave of the complainant from 22-6-1992 to 02-9-1992 be sanctioned and that the salary for the period from 02-9-1992 till 15-11-1992 be released. A copy of the letter issued by the Superintending Engineer to the Executive Engineer was marked to the complainant. The complainant accordingly went to Pusad on 29-5-1993 and met the accused who was working as a senior clerk. The complainant requested the accused that the sick leave be sanctioned and the salary be released. The accused 4 apeal135.02 asked the complainant to pay an amount of Rs.200/- assuring that he would soon put up the note-sheet for sanction of the sick leave and the payment of the salary. The complainant was asked by the accused to come to the office of the Executive Engineer, Public Works Department, Pusad with an amount of Rs.200/- on 08-6-1993. The complainant was unwilling to pay the illegal gratification and lodged the oral complaint Exhibit 13.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.