I C CHITTARANJAN DASS Vs. STATE SPECIAL POLICE ESTABLISHMENT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two appeals arise out of C.C. No. 40/77 on the file of the Special Judge for S.P.E. cases, Hyderabad, in which the appellant in the former was tried for an offence under S. 5(1)(e) read with S. 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and was convicted and sentenced to undergo imprisonment till the rising of Court and also to pay a fine of Rs. 40,000.00 in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and nine months. The accused preferred the former appeal questioning the correctness of his conviction and also the sentence of fine imposed against him The State, represented by the Special Police Establishment, preferred the latter appeal complaining that the minimum sentence of one years imprisonment provided for the said offence should have been at least imposed against the accused.

(2.) The prosecution case in short is that the accused while working as an Assistant Medical Officer, Class-II in the Railway Department was found to be in possession of Rs. 46,456.77 p. and could not satisfactorily account for the sources for acquiring such disproportionate assets. The prosecution case is confined to the check period from 1-1-1969 to 12-4-1972, on which later date, the residential quarter of the accused at Rajahmundry was raided and searched during investigation. The prosecution case proceeds on the basis that at the commencement of the check period i.e., on 1-1-1969, the accused was having assets of the value of Rs. 66,333.60 p. and at the close of the check period, he was found to be in possession of assets of the value of Rs. 1,42,773.11 p. and during that check period he acquired assets to the tune of Rs. 76,439.51 p. The prosecution case is that during the check period, his total income from known sources was Rs. 52,646.80 p., and his total expenditure is Rs. 22,664.60 Ps. leaving a saving of only Rs. 29,982.74 p. The prosecution, therefore, claimed that after deducting the aforesaid saving of Rs. 29,982.74p. The accused has come into possession of disproportionate assets to the extent of Rs. 46,456.77 p. for which he could not satisfactorily account. The Special Judge found the disproportionate assets to be worth Rs. 36,504.80 p.

(3.) The accused has given various explanations in proof on his defence which are detailed below. He was a Doctor in the Railway and private practice was not prohibited. Limited private practice is, in fact, permitted as can be seen from Ex. D-2 and Rules 205 to 209 of the Indian Railway Medical Manual. The evidence of DWs. 8 and 9 who are working as Railway Guards and the evidence of DW. 10 a grocery merchant of Telgi is that of independent witnesses and has been wrongly rejected by the Special Judge. The investigation proceeded on a wrong assumption that private practice was not permitted to the accused and the accused is, therefore, prejudiced in his trial. The charge-sheet is filed restricting the check period from 1-1-1969 to 12-4-1972. The accused joined the railway service on 1-12-1965. Unless his total income and expenditure ever since he joined the service in railways in taken into account, one cannot properly arrive at the actual assets in his hands as on 1-1-1969. In making the investigation limiting it to the check period, the accused, has been prejudiced. At the time the accused was married on 7-7-1957, to Smt. Shoba Das, DW-7, he was given a Cash dowry of Rs. 10,000.00 and his wife was given 25 tolas of gold. DW-7 is an accomplished house wife. She was knowing knitting, sewing, painting, doll making, printing of sarees and screens, tailoring and embroidery. She was also good at preparing jams, jellies, bread and biscuits. She used to train persons who were approaching her and she was getting an annual income of Rupees 1,000/- on an average. They were having a small poultry and kitchen garden and besides meeting their needs, they were able to earn some money by selling chicken, eggs and vegetables. While augmenting their income they were able to save in the expenses for running the house. A cash of Rs. 6,000.00 belonging to his maternal grand-mother and some gold jewels belonging to his sister Swapna Das were sent to him for safe custody by his father Dr. Indramohana Das (DW-1) respectively through Devaranjan Das (DW-3) and Dr. Babranjan Das (DW-4), brothers of the accused. DW-4 kept Rs. 6,000.00 of his own money with the accused for safe custody. Rs. 4,000.00 deposited in the United Bank of India, Malda, is the money belonging to DW-2, the mother of the accused not to the accused. Another Rs. 4,000.00 belonging to the widowed sister-in-law of the accused was handed over to him for safe custody through DW-5, another brother the accused.