DAYARAM PHUKAN AND ANR. Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two appeals are connected, in that they relate to the same transaction on which the prosecution relied to prove the charges against the appellant, herein - after referred .to as the accused. The appellant in Criminal Appeal 64 of 1964 is one Dayaram Phukan, who is an Assistant Inspector of Excise. He was charged with abetting accused Santi Ram Nath, Inspector of Excise, a publics servant, in the commission of an offence punishable under Section 161 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 as amended in 1958. Santi Ram Nath was also an accused in the case of Dayaram Phukan, appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 64 of 1964, both the persons having been tried together. The accused in Criminal Appeal No. 67 of 1964 is one Ramesh Chandra Deb and he was charged with abetting the public servant Santi Ram Nath, Inspector of Excise, in the commission of an offence punishable under Section 181, Indian Penal Code, thereby committing an offence punishable under Section 165A of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) IT may be stated at the outset that the charges framed against these two accused persons are hopelessly defective and do not convey any information to the accused persons as to the nature of the abetment committed and as to the nature of the offence that they are said to have abetted. There is nothing to show what that offence is and how that offence was committed, the commission of which they are said to have abetted. The charges are of the vaguest description possible. But what is common to both the charges is that both the accused persons are said to have committed abetment in respect of Santi Ram Nath, Inspector of Excise, who was also tried along with accused Dayaram Phukan, by the Special Judge, Now gong.

(3.) IN the result, these appeals, are allows and the conviction and sentence against the appellants are set aside. The accused appellants are discharged from their bail bonds which are hereby cancelled.