PURAN Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PURAN and Chartu have filed this criminal appeal and it has been directed against the judgment order dated 21.4.1997, passed by the learned special Judge, Jind, who convicted the appellants under Section 8 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and Section 163, IPC, and sentenced them to undergo R.I. for a period of 4 years under Section 8 of the Act and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default of payment of fine, the appellants were further directed to undergo Simple Imprisonment for three months each. The appellants were further directed to undergo R.I. for a period of three months each under Section 163, IPC. Both the sentences were directed to run concurrently.

(2.) BEFORE I proceed further, I may mention at the first instance that with the passing of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, and by virtue of Section 31 of the Act, the provisions of Sections 160 to 165-A have been omitted and, in those circumstances, there was no Section like Section 163, IPC, as on 9.9.1998, under which the appellants could be convicted, when the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, came into force.

(3.) IN order to prove the charges, the prosecution examined PW.1 H.C. Ram Singh, P.W.2 HC Dharamvir Singh, independent witness PW.3 Dharamvir Singh, Constable Balraj Singh, PW.4 SI Ved Ram, PW.5, PW.6. DSP Amir Singh and Kuldeep Gupta, Draftsman, PW.7.