A regular case, is therefore registered and entrusted to Inspector Baldev Rai Handa for investigation.
Now therefore, the Central Govt both hereby accord sanction under Section 197 Code of Criminal Procedure Act No.
11 of 1947 of the said Act and Section 409 of the P.C. And whereas the Central Govt.
1350 per acre amounting to Rs.
In reply the Appellant states in his letter Ex.
Som Nath for the said offences and for any other offences punishable under the provision of law in respect of the aforesaid acts by the Court of companypetent jurisdiction.
of India.
He may please be asked to companyplete this formality without any loss of time.
In respect of this allegation the First Information Report Ex.
66,784.50 np.
The case of the prosecution initially was that after the land so acquired with the standing crop was taken possession of by the Appellant he sold the crop to Moti Ram and Kewal Chand for Rs.
Against that companyviction and sentence he appealed to the High Court which maintained the companyviction and sentence.
Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated April 9, 1969 of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Criminal Appeal No.
Treasury companyverted it to his own use And whereas the said acts of Major Som Nath companystituted offences punishable under Section 5 2 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, read With Section 5 1 c and d Act No.
Apart from this amount companypensation was also awarded for standing crop amounting to Rs.
On the 6th April, 1963 he has again written to the Garrison Engineer saying as follows You have verbally asked me number to take the site after the crop is cut and the necessary marking of the alignment has been taken in hand but this handing over has number been shown on the site order book by the A.G.E. B R despite my request.
abused his position as a public servant and caused pecuniary advantage to said Shri Moti Ram and Kewal Chand by giving them standing crops worth Rs.
He thus.
Major Som Nath did number account for this amount in the Govt.
After this F.I.R. certain statements were recorded by the Military authorities being DA to DE,DM, DM 1, DN DL of Mani gain, Mulkh, Raj, Ganpat Ram, Telu Ram, Kewal Chand and Sukhchain Lal Jain.
Whereas it is alleged that Major Som Nath while functioning as Garrison Engineer, M.E.S., Air Field at Sirsa from 13 2 63 to 54 1963 by companyrupt or illegal means or by otherwise abusing his position, as such public servant, obtained pecuniary advantage of Rs.
after, accepting illegal gratification of Rs.
2500 for allowing the standing crops to be cut from the land acquired for the extension of Air Field Sirsa and or he dishonestly or fraudulently realised and misappropriated Rs.
A chargesheet was filed against the Appellant under Section 5 1 c and 5 1 d read with 5 2 of the Prevention of Corruption Act on 5 8 1966 after obtaining sanction from the Govt.
By order and in the name of the President.
Sd A. P. Veera Raghavan Deputy Secretary to the Govt.
P. 12 dated the 10th April The matter has already been discussed with you and finalised.
13,000 for a companysideration of.
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Appeal No.102 of 1969.
Frank Anthony and K. B. Rohatgi, for the appellant.
of India, Ministry of Home Affairs on llth April, 1966 as per Ex.
11,073.13 np.
The sanction that has been accorded is in the following terms 11th April 1966.
P. 26 in respect of these lands, which actually measured 49.47 54 S. C. India/71 acres, at Rs.
The accused was however companyvicted under the first charge for an offence under Section 5 1 c in that he being a Garrison Engineer incharge of the Air Field Sirsa and in that capacity entrusted with standing crops of Sarson, Gram and Lusan on 30 acres of land a part of 49 acres of land acquired by the Govt.
after fully and carefully examining the materials before it in regard to the said allegations and circumstances of the case, companysider that Major Som Nath should be prosecuted in a companyrt of law for the said offences.
3000 from them.
Revenues.,
11,073.13 by the Revenue authorities, dishonestly or fraudulently allowed Moti Ram of Sirsa to misappropriate the said standing crop and thereby companytravened Section 5 1 c of the Prevention of Corruption Act punishable with Section 5 2 of that Act.
of India took steps to acquire some lands of agriculturists pursuant to which a Notification dated November 27, 1962 was issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act 1884 for acquiring 51.79 acres of land situated in the State of Ahmedpur.
On the next day another Notification was issued under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act on November 28, 1962 and in view of the emergency action under Section 17 was taken for obtaining possession of the land With a view to its development.
and which had been valued at Rs.
1055 of 1966.
The facts of the case in brief are that in view of the Chinese invasion Air Field at Sirsa required to be extended for which purpose the Ministry of Defence, Govt.
No further action is required to be taken.
R. Khanna and R. N. Sachthey, for the respondents.
The Collector gave his award on 26 2 63 Ex.
The lands which were acquired belonged to several land holders including Moti Ram and P.W. 12 Kewal Chand.
5 of 1898 and Section 6 1 a of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 Act II of 1947 for the prosecution of Maj.
11073 13 by Shri Moti Ram and Kewal Chand etc.,
2500 and facilitated the cutting and taking away of the crop by postponing the handing over of the possession to the companytractor till the 5th April 1963 and misappropriated the money.
2500 during the aforesaid period as the value of the crops cut from the land acquired for the extension of Air Field Sirsa, which crops had been entrusted to him as a public servant and he instead of depositing the said sale price into the Govt.
P. 29 was issued on 14 1 64 in which the following statement is relevant It is alleged that Major Som Nath accused who is a Garrison Engineer Sirsa Air Field subsequently sometime in the months of March and April 1963 permitted the removal of the standing crop valued at Rs.
3,000 only, which amount he accepted for his personal use and thereby also abused his official position and obtained pecuniary advantage, for himself in a sum of Rs.
