KHANDU SONU DHOBI Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal by special leave by Khandu Sonu Dhobi and Bhikanrao Rambhau Khairnar against the judgment of the Bombay High Court affirming on appeal the conviction of the appellants under section 218 read with section 34, section 477A read with section 34 and section 409 read with section 34 of Indian Penal Code as well as under Section 5(2) read with Section 5 (1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. Sentence of rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and a fine of Rs. 200 or in default further rigorous imprisonment for a period of two months has been awarded on each count to the appellants. The substantive sentences have been ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) Dhobi appellant No. 1 was an agricultural assistant and was working under Khairnar appellant No. 2 who was agricultural supervisor in the soil conservation section of the Government of Maharashtra. Dhobi was incharge of the work relating to a Bundh in block No. 13 of village Asane in Taluka Nandurbar. The above block comprises agricultural lands bearing survey Nos. 8, 17, 18, 19 and 32 measuring 90 acres. The Bundhs were being constructed since the year 1962 Rectification work in respect of those Bundhs at a cost of Rs. 369.07 had to be got done by Dhobi appellant under the supervision of Khairnar appellant. The Government sanctioned an amount of Rs. 4779 in connection with the construction of the Bundhs. An advance amount of Rs. 5000 was received by Khairnar accused on March 2, 1966 in that connection. Work of the value of Rs. 4400 was done but that relating to rectification work was not done. According to the rules of the soil conservation section, the Government spent the money in the first instance and after the report of the completion of work was received, the expenses were recovered from the landowners for whose benefit the work was done. On March 11, 1966 Khairnar made entries in measurement book:Ex. 27 showing that he had checked 28 payments and certified the same. Khairnar accused also stated in the entry that he had passed the measurements and paid Rs. 369.07. Paysheets Ex. 64 were prepared by Dhobi accused and he obtained the thumb impressions and signatures of the labourers on the paysheets. Khairnar made his initials below the thumb impressions in the paysheets. On the last page of the paysheets, Khairnar signed a certificate according to which he had paid Rs. 369.07 to PW 10. Jagan Trimbak who used to do the labour work. Final bill Ex. 28 was also prepared on that day by the accused and the signature of Jagan Trimbak was obtained on the same. The bill was got signed from PW 7 Ziparu Tukaram and another person as attesting witness. The bill was signed thereafter by Khairnar. Debit entry Ex. 32 of Rs. 369.07 was made by Khairnar accused in the cash book. He also prepared work abstract Ex. 29 on April 16, 1966 and sent it to the sub-divisional soil conservation officer Nandurbar showing an expenditure of Rs. 369.07.

(3.) The case of the prosecution was that the measurement book Ex. 27, paysheets Ex. 64, final bill Ex. 28 and cash book entry Ex. 32 were false documents and were fabricated by the accused without doing any rectification work on the Bundh. The accused thus committed criminal breach of trust in respect of the amount of Rs. 369.07 in furtherance of their common intention to misappropriate government property. According further to the prosecution case, the landowners in block No. 13 came to know of the above acts of the accused and they complained about it to Sarpanch Tanku Bhagwan (PW 12). Tanku sent a telegram on April 12, 1966 to the superintending agricultural officer, Bombay Division, Nasik in this connection. A copy of the telegram was therefore sent by the superintending agricultural officer to divisional soil conservation officer D. S. D. Ghate (PW 1) for necessary action as well as for enquiry and report. Ghate PW went to village Asane on May 2, 1966 and inspected block No. 13. He found that entries had been made about the payment of Rs. 369.07 in the measurement book and cash book even though no rectification work had been done. Ghate submitted his report on May 6, 1966 for proceeding departmentlly against the accused. On receipt of the above report, the superintending agricultural officer directed P.R. Inamdar (PW 11), deputy director or agricultural engineering, to go to Asane village and submit his report after personally verifying the facts. Inamdar went with Ghate to block No. 13 in Asane village on May 11, 1966. Both Inamdar and Ghate found that no rectification work had been done. They did not find even a single pit in the lands in that block although, according to measurement book, 83 pits had been recently dug. Inamdar and Ghate also met the Sarpanch and other landowners of Asane village. Report dated May 18, 1966 was thereafter submitted by Inamdar affirming those facts.