Nargundkar denied having attended office on the 9th November, 1946.
He was kept by the police away from the office for about eight months during the investigation, he was asked to proceed on leave at the instance of the police and his leave was extended at their request.
Admittedly accused 2 was working as an agent of Habibur Rahman and his son Zakirur Rahman for the distillery companytracts of Betul and Seoni, and, therefore, he must have been the author number only of his own tender but of the tenders submitted by Habibur Rahman and Zakirur Rahman, Exhibits P 4 and P 5.
Accused Nargundkar stated that the endorsement was made by him on the 21st November, 1946.
Flat rates on the basis of the price of mahua flowers for three years 1948 51.
This letter was handed over by accused 1 to the Office Superintendent, S. W. Gadgil P. W. 13 about the middle of August, 1947, and thereafter accused 1 wrote a letter Exhibit P. 26 , on the 2nd October, 1947, to Sri S. Sanyal P. W. 19 who was then the Excise Commissioner, requesting that this letter Exhibit P 24 and a numbere sheet Exhibit P 27 be kept in safe custody.
152 and 153 of 1949.
File, and marked to Superintendent S was number made on the 21st November, 1946, which date it bears.
Rates on sliding scale for four years.
2,000, Rs.
In response to this tender numberice, five tenders were filed including those filed by 1 appellant, R. S. Patel, 2 K. B. Habibur Rahman, 3 Zakirur Rahman, and 4 Edulji P. Doongaji P. W. 4 , in sealed companyers with the Excise Commissioner on the 31st October, 1946, and he handed them over with the seals intact to the office superintendent, S. W. Gadgil P. W. 13 , for safe custody.
According to him, the tenders were opened by him in the office on the 11th November, 1946.
Exhibit P 9 is the numberice calling for tenders for the supply of companyntry spirit in the Seoni distillery area.
The learned Sessions Judge quashed the companyviction of both the appellants under the first charge of criminal companyspiracy under section 120 B, I.P.C. but maintained the companyvictions and sentences under section 465, I.P.C., on the charges of forging Exhibits P 3 A and P 24.
In April, 1946, he was appointed Excise Commissioner, Madhya Pradesh, and companytinued to hold that office till the 5th September 1947.
In order to create evidence in their favour they brought into existence a letter Exhibit P 24 and antedated it to 20th November, 1946.
He did so because he companysulted one Mr. Munshi, Personal Assistant to the Excise Commissioner, whether he should quote each rate separately and Mr. Munshi told him that he companyld give flat rate for the companybined years as well as flat rates and also sliding scale rates for each year separately.
Gadgil took them to his room and kept them under lock and key in the office safe.
The fact that the sealed tenders were handed over by Gadgil to accused Nargundkar on the 9th November has been held proved solely on the uncorroborated testimony of Gadgil as against the denial of Nargundkar.
2,000, Rs.
56 of 1951 H. G. Nargundkar, Excise Commissioner, Madhya Pradesh , and the appellant in Criminal Appeal No.
Habibur Rahman and Zakirur Rahman in their tenders, Exhibits P 4 and P 5 quoted one flat rate for four years and did number mention separate flat rates for separate years.
All in sliding scale rate on the basis of the price of mahua flowers for three years 1948 51.
57 of 1951 R. S. Patel were tried in the companyrt of Shri B. K. Chaudhri, Special Magistrate, Nagpur, for the offence of companyspiracy to secure the companytract of Seoni Distillery from April, 1947, to March 1951 by forging the tender, Exhibit P 3A, and for companymission of the offences of forgery of the tender Exhibit P 3A and of another document, Exhibit P 24.
On the expiry of his leave he was kept off duty without salary for a period of about five months but later on he was paid his full salary after he had given evidence in support of the prosecution.
He denied having taken the tenders home.
Both the accused denied the companymission of the offences of criminal companyspiracy, forgery and abetment thereof.
In May, 1947, on receipt of an application Exhibit P 1 from one Dilbagrai P. W. 14 , enquiries were started by the Anti Corruption Department.
The appellant, Nargundkar, is a member of the Central Provinces Berar Provincial Service and held the substantive post of Deputy Commissioner for several years.
On the 11th September, 1946, Nargundkar in his capacity as Excise Commissioner invited tenders for working the Government distillery at Seoni and supplying spirit to certain specified districts for a period of four years from 1st April, 1947, to 31st March, 1951.
Both the accused became aware of the enquiry.
He stated that the tender Exhibit P 3A was the original tender submitted by him on the 31st October, 1946.
1,000, under the first, second and third charges respectively.
It was further alleged that the endorsement made by accused 1 Nargundkar in the said letter No action seems necessary.
Doongaji in his tender, Exhibit P 6, mentioned separate flat rates for each separate year also.
An application was then made under article 136 of the Constitution of India for special leave to appeal and this was allowed by this Court on 24th March, 1950.
He received his technical education and practical training in America and after working as Chief Chemist and General Manager in factories in Madras for five years, came to the Central Provinces in 1944, when the Provincial Government gave him a licence to set up a distillery for the manufacture of industrial spirit.
The last date for submitting the tenders was the 31st October 1946.
Accused 2 denied that the tender of Doongaji was shown to him by accused 1 between the 9th and 11th November, 1946.
Both the appellants went up in revision against this decision to the High Court but without any success.
The appellant, R. S. Patel, is a sugar Technologist and Chemical Engineer.
On a companyplaint filed by the Assistant Inspector General of Police, Anti Corruption Department, Nagpur, the appellant in Criminal Appeal No.
Gadgil was himself a suspect in the case.
2,000 and Rs.
The case for the prosecution is that on the 9th November, 1946, accused Nargundkar took these sealed tenders home, that the tenders were opened by him at his house, that the rates of the tender Exhibit P. 6 of E. J. Doongaji P. W. 4 were divulged to accused 2 R. S. Patel , who was allowed to substitute another tender Exhibit P 3A , companytaining rates lower than those of Doongaji, that thereafter these open tenders were brought to the office on the 11th November, 1946, and given to Amarnath P. W. 20 who was the Assistant Commissioner of Excise, for submitting a report and that on the recommendation of Nargundkar the tender of accused 2 Patel was accepted and the companytract was given to him.
He sentenced R. S. Patel to rigorous imprisonment for one year under each charge and to pay fines of Rs.
1,000, under the first, second and third charges respectively.
This document was forged with the intention of companymitting fraud and of causing injury to Amarnath P. W. 20 and also to Doongaji P. W. 4 .
Accused 2 stated that it was number typed on article A. He also alleged that the allegations made in Exhibit P 24 were companyrect.
As regards Exhibit P 24, it was denied that it was fabricated or antedated.
He made additions and improvements on vital points from stage of stage of his deposition and in certain particulars his statement was companytradicted by Ramaswami, P. W. 30.
In order to prove the second charge the prosecution had to establish that Gadgil, P. W. 13, handed over the sealed tenders on the 9th November, 1946, to accused Nargundkar, that the latter took them home, that between the 9th and the 11th November he met Patel at his house or elsewhere and that accused Nargundkar showed or companymunicated the particulars of the tender of Doongaji to accused Patel who substituted Exhibit P 3A for his original tender before the 11th November, 1946.
Nargundkar in the numbere sheet, Exhibit P 27, in the month of July or August, 1947.
The first charge having failed, numberhing need be said about it herein.
Admittedly there is numberdirect evidence to prove any of these facts except the first one, and the nature of the case is such that recourse companyld only be had to circumstantial evidence to establish those facts.
Exhibit P 24 is alleged to have been typed on a typewriter Article A which was purchased on the 30th December, 1946, by the National Industrial Alcohol Co., Nagpur, of which accused Patel was the managing director.
The dates were antedated.
The learned Special Magistrate companyvicted both the appellants on all the three charges.
All of them were acting together with the object of getting the companytract though they were submitting three separate tenders.
2,000 and Rs.
The rates which were called for by this numberice were as follows Flat rate for four years.
Mahajan, J. This is a companysolidated appeal by special leave from the two orders of the High Court of Judicature at Nagpur passed on the 9th March, 1950, in Criminal Revisions Nos.
The appellant Nargundkar was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for six months under each charge and to pay fines of Rs.
All in rate on the sliding scale for one year 1947 48.
Each of the appellants appealed against their respective companyvictions and sentences to the Court of the Sessions Judge, Nagpur.
The trial magistrate held on a companystruction of it that numberrate or rates of separate years were asked for in this numberice and that one flat rate was only asked for, for four years.
