Case Title: M/S.Shreyas Marketing V. Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council
Bench : The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kauser Edappagath
Date : 16/06/2023
Criminal Appeal No. 1692 of 2013
This case involves an appeal filed by the appellant/accused against the judgement of the Enquiry Commissioner and Special Judge, Kottayam. The appellant was convicted and sentenced under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read with 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The prosecution’s case is that the appellant, while working as a Village Officer in 2006, accepted a bribe of ₹650/- from the complainant for providing a location map.
The appellant’s counsel argued that the prosecution failed to prove the demand for illegal gratification and that the evidence of acceptance was not convincing. The defence claimed that the appellant was framed by the complainant, who put the marked currency notes in the appellant’s pocket. The prosecution relied on the testimonies of the complainant (PW1), an independent witness (PW2), and the investigating officer (PW9) to establish the guilt of the appellant.
The court noted that the appellant admitted to receiving the possession certificate and issuing the location map to the complainant. The prosecution’s evidence, including the marked currency notes recovered from the appellant, supported the allegation of demand and acceptance of the bribe. The court found that the evidence presented by the prosecution was reliable and sufficient to establish the guilt of the appellant. The court dismissed the appeal and upheld the conviction and sentence imposed by the court below. The appellant was sentenced to six months of rigorous imprisonment and a fine of ₹10,000/- under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, and one year of rigorous imprisonment and a fine of ₹15,000/- under Section 13(1)(d) read with 13(2) of the Act. The sentences were ordered to run concurrently.
The court found the appellant guilty of accepting a bribe as a public servant and affirmed the conviction and sentence imposed by the lower court. The testimonies of the complainant and other witnesses, along with the recovery of the marked currency notes, were considered strong evidence against the appellant. The court’s decision reflects the importance of combating corruption and holding public servants accountable for their actions.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
WRITTEN BY- ANVITHA RAO