JAWAHAR LAL WALI versus STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND ORS.

Citation: [1993] 2 S.C.R. 218 · Decided: 05-03-1993 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: B.P. JEEVAN REDDY · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
JAWAHAR LAL WALi 
v. 
STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND ORS. 
MARCH 5, 1993 
[B.P. JEEVAN REDDY AND N. VENKATACHALA, JJ.] 
Jammu & Kashmir Govemment ServOllts' Prevention of Corrnptio11 Act, 
1975: Section 4(d)-Charge uttdei-Officer to pay the value of ice-making 
plant of 70 kg. capacity and installation charges-Officer making payme1t1 
C accepting supply of 35 kg. Capacity of plant-wltether com1pti01i-Plea of 
bonafide belief whether could be established without examilling himself in 
enquity-Exoneration of another officer of similar charge of com1ption-£ffect 
of. 
The Director of the Animal Husbandry Department in the State of 
D Jammu and Kashmir wanted ice-making plants of 70 kgs. capacity com-
plete with motor for its Central Artificial Breeding Stations. On 93.1968 
a notification was issued inviting quotations. M/s. Ashoka Brothers 
responded to the notification. As it quoted the lowest rate, the Director 
accepted its quotation after obtaining necessary approval from the 
I • 
. ...,._ 
E departmental committee set up for the purpose. The firm also was com-
municated the acceptance of its quotation. The Director also informed The 
ODicers-in-Charge of the Central Artificial Breeding Stations of the accep-
tance of the quotation of the firm and authorised each of them to place the 
necessary order for supply of one such plant, to accept suppl)' and to make - -..,-· 
F 
payment of Rs. 8,600 the value of the plant and Rs. 450 its installation 
charges, on obtaining satisfaction that the plant so supplied was of the 
desired make and specifications. 
The appellant placed an order with the firm and on 17.1-1969, the 
supply was accepted and passed for payment the bill of costs relating to 
G the plant subject to retention of Rs. 1,556.72 ps. towards guarantee of 
proper performance of the plant. 
The Anti-Corruption department investigated into a complaint 
against the appellant and it discovered that the appellant had accepted an 
ice-making plant from the firm of 35 kgs. capacity as against 70 kgs. 
H capacity plant paying the price of the latter. 
218 
-
JAWAHAR LAL v. STATE OF J & K 
219 
The appellant was charged for corruption under clause(d) of Section A 
4 of the Jammu & Kashmir Government Servant's Prevention of Corrup-
tion Act, 1975 by the Anti-Corruption Tribunal and an explanation was 
sought from him. 
The appellant filed a written statement denying the charge levelled 
against him. He took the plea that he being a non-technical man accepted 
supply of 35 kgs. capacity ice-making plant from the firm under bona fide 
belief that it had to be regarded as 70 kgs. capacity ice-making plant 
because of its capacity to produce 70 kgs. ice, if put to use twice a day. 
B 
At the inquiry appellant supported his plea by examining two wit-
C 
nesses, one from the firm and another from the Cold Storage Division of 
the Agro-Industries Develpment of the State. However, he did not examine 
himself to establish the truth of his bona fide belief set out in his defence 
plea. 
The Anti-Corruption Tribunal finding the appellant guilty of the D 
change recommended to the Governor of the State for imposition of a 
penalty therefor of demotion of the appellant from the post held. by him to 
the next lower time-scale of pay for a period of five years. 
The appellant in a writ petition under Article 226 challenged the 
order of the Anti-Corruption Tribunal in the High Court, which was E 
dismissed in lin1ine. 
Hence this present appeal before this Court by special leave. 
The appellant contended that the Anti-Corrpution Tribunal was 
wholly unjustified in finding the appellant guilty of the charge of corrup-
tion, while another officer who accepted supply of the same type of plant 
from the same firm supplied on the basis of the same quotation and paid 
for it, was exonerated of the similar charge of corruption. 
Dismissing the appeal, this Court, 
HELD :1.01. The appellant was an otncer who was required to accept 
supply of 'Ice-making plant of 70 Kgs. capacity with one motor', aller 
oLtaining satisfaction that the plant supplied was the desired plant and 
F 
G 
was according to the specifications. But, the very explanation given by the 
appellant in defence of the charge makes it evident that he accepted the H 
220 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
(1993] 2 S.C.R. 
A supply of Ice-making plant knowing it to be of 35 Kgs. capacity and not of 
°" 
70 Kgs. capacity. Such conclusion is inescapable because of the fact of 
non-den

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.