TMI Blog1962 (12) TMI 96X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... P. V. Gopinathan Nambiar without revealing the fact that he was his brother- in-law and by making false entries in the relevant records showing that the said land contained only 97 trees valued at ₹ 165/-, whereas the land had actually 150 trees worth ₹ 1450/-. The suppression of the fact that the assignee was his brother-in-law and the underestimate of the value of the land were dishonestly made to circumvent the rules governing the assignment of lands to landless poor. The Special judge and on appeal the High Court held that the appellant dishonestly underestimated the extent and the value of the trees in the said land with a view to help his brother-in-law and thereby committed an offence under s. 5(2), read with s. 1(4) of the Act. Hence the appeal. Learned counsel for the appellant raised before us 2 points : (1) Section 5(1)(a) of the Act does not apply to a case of wrongful loss caused to Government by a public servant who by deceit induced it to part with its property : (2) The High Court acted erroneously in relying upon a report dated April 5, 1961, made by the district Forest Officer, Kozhikode, filed by the public prosecutor after the appeal was reserved for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ase of a wrongful loss caused to the Government by abuse of his power. This conclusion, the argument proceeds, flows from three circumstances. (1) The benefit obtained in clause (b) must be similar to that provided for in clauses (a) (b) 14 e., benefit obtained from a third party; (2) The case of wrongful loss to the Government is provided by clause (c) and any other loss which does not fall within that clause is outside the scope of the section; (3) Though the word obtains' has a wide meaning in the setting in which it appears in clause (d) but in view of the fact that the same word used in a limited sense in is used in a limited sense in clauses (a) (b), it should be given a limited meaning, namely, gets a benefit from a third party . It takes colour from the same word used in clauses (a) (b).. He finally contends that the construction he is seeking to put forward for our acceptance fits in the general scope and scheme of the Act and that the Legislature intended to leave the losses caused to the Government by the deception caused by its public servant to be dealt with in accordance with the provisions of the Indian Penal Code or other appropriate laws. At the outs ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s at P. 191 No doubt all penal Statutes are to be construed strictly, that is to say, the Court must see that the thing charged as an offence is within the plain meaning of the words used, and must not strain the words on any notion that there has been a slip, that there has been a casus omissus, that the thing is so clearly within, the mischief, that it must have been intended to be included and would have been included if thought of. On the other hand, the person charged has a right to say that the thing charged, although within the Words, is not within the spirit of the enactment. But where the thing is brought within the words and within the spirit, there a penal. enactment to be construed, like any other instrument, according to the fair common-sense meaning of the language used, and the Court is not to find or make any doubt or ambiguity in the language of a penal statute, where such doubt or ambiguity would clearly not be found or made in the same language in any other instrument. In our view this passage, if we may say so, restates the rule of construction of a penal provision from A correct perspective. As we will presently show the case of the appellant on the facts ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cuniary advantage, he can certainly be said to obtain the said thing or a pecuniary advantage; but it is said that in clauses () (c) the same word is used and in the context of those clauses it can only mean getting from a third party other than the Government and therefore the game meaning must be given to the said word in clause (d). Obtains' in clause (a) (b) in the context of those provisions may mean taking a bribe from a third party, but there is no reason why the same meaning shall be given to that word used in a different context when that word is comprehensive enough to fit in the scheme of that provision. Nor can we agree that as dishonest misappropriation has been (c), the other cases of wrongful loss caused Government by the deceit practiced by a public officer should fall outside the section. There is no reason why when a comprehensive statute was passed to prevent corruption, this particular category of corruption should have been excluded therefrom because the consequences of such acts are equally harmful to the public as acts of bribery. On a plain reading of the express words used in the clause, we have no doubt that every benefit obtained by a public serv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erving in Delhi FireBrigade, The latter sought the assistance of the aappellant who had nothing to do with the issuing of licences of fire-arms which was done by the 'Office of the Deputy Commissioner, Delhi. The appellant took a bribe in order to get the licence for him. It was argued that as it was not the duty of the appellant to issue licences or do something in connection therewith, he, did not commit any offence within the meaning of s. 5 (1)(d) of the Act. This Court rejected his contention. Sinha, C.J., speaking for the Court observed at p. 198: The legislature advisedly widened the scope of the crime by giving a who, holding public office and taking advantage of their position obtain any valuable thing or pecuniary advantage. The observations made by this Court in the above two cases though made in a different context show the comprehensive nature of the said provision. We therefore hold that the accused in order to assign the land to his brother-in-law underestimated the value of the said land to conform with the rules and thereby abused his position as a public servant and obtained for him a valuable thing or a pecuniary advantage within the meaning of the said cla ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e respondent without given an opportunity to the appellant to file objections or to contest its reliability. We think the principles of natural justice require that no court shall give a finding whether on fact or law and particularly on facts without giving an opportunity to all the contesting parties. As that principle has been violated in this case, we have no option but to set aside the finding of the learned judge on the question of the valuation of the trees on the plot assigned to the appellant's brother-in-law.We therefore set aside this finding and request the High Court to submit a revised finding on the said question within two months from the receipt of the record. The respondent may file a further statement if I e so chooses to explain or even to correct the valuation list already filed by it. Thereafter an opportunity will be given to the appellant to file his objections. The objections filed by the appellant in this Court may be also considered by the High Court. The High Court will submit the finding on the evidence already on record including the said objections and statements. The parties may file objections to the finding within two weeks from the date the sa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
