IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.697 OF 2000 Lalu Sakharam Rathod ...Appellant(s) Versus State of Maharashtra ...Respondent(s) O R D E R Heard learned counsel for the parties.
Trial Court convicted the appellant under Section 7 read with Section 13 (1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 [hereinafter referred to as “the Act”] and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months and to pay fine of Rupees five hundred; in default, to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for a period of two months. He was further convicted under Section 13 (2) of the Act and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay fine of Rupees one thousand; in default, to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for a period three months. Both the sentences, however, were ordered to run concurrently. On appeal being preferred, High Court confirmed the convictions. Hence, this appeal by special leave.
...2/-
- 2 -
Having heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties and perused the records, we are of the view that the Trial Court as well as the High Court have recorded convictions of the appellant upon threadbare discussion of evidence and no interference by this Court is called for.
The appeal, accordingly, fails and the same is dismissed.
Bail bonds of the appellant, who is on bail, are cancelled and he is directed to be taken into custody forthwith to serve out the remaining period of sentence for which the matter shall be reported to this Court by the Trial Court within two months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
. J.
[B.N. AGRAWAL] . J.
[G.S. SINGHVI] . J.
[AFTAB ALAM] New Delhi, November 06, 2008.