LexM.C. GUPTA versus CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, DEHRADUN
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2012] 7 S.C.R. 455 M.C. GUPTA v. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, DEHRADUN (Criminal Appeal No. 1332 of 2012 etc.) AUGUST 31, 2012 [AFTAB ALAM AND RANJANA PRAKASH DESAI, JJ.] PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION ACT, 1988: A B s. 30(2) of 1988 Act read with s. 6 of General Clauses Act, c 1897 - Saving of investigation under the repealed Act - Offence committed while 1947 Act was in force - FIR registered for offences punishable under the 1947 Act, after coming into force of the 1988 Act - Conviction and sentence upheld by High Court - Held: By virtue of s.30(2) of the 1988 0 Act, read with ss. 6(c) and 6(e) of the General Clauses Act, 1897, the right of C.B./. to investigate the crime, institute the proceedings and prosecute the accused is saved and not affected by the repeal of the 1947 Act. - Thus, the right to investigate and the corresponding liability incurred are saved E - Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 - ss.5(1) and 5(2) - Penal Code, 1860 - ss. 120-B and 409-Constitution of India, 1950- Art. 20. PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION ACT, 1947: ss.5(2) read with 5(1)(e) of 1947 Act and ss.120-8 and 409 /PC - Conviction and sentence - Held: The guilt of the accused is clearly established and, therefore, no interference with the order of conviction is necessary - However, keeping F in view the old age and ailments A-1 is suffering from, his G sentence of 2 years' RI u!s 409 /PC is reduced to one year's RI - Rest of the sentences awarded to him and the other accused are maintained-Sentence/sentencing. 455 H 456 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2012] 7 S.C.R. A The appellant in Crl. Appeal No. 1332 of 2012 (A-1 ), while working as Assistant Divisional Manager, New India Assurance Company Ltd., got a bank draft of Rs.1,00,000/ - prepared on 9.7.1988 from the Company's account in favour of a Dal Mill owned by his relative, namely, the B appellant in Crl. Appeal No, 1333 of 2012(A-2). A-1 then collected the said bank draft and sent it to A-2 who deposited the same in the account of his Dal Mill on 14.7.1988. An FIR for offence u/s 5(2) read with s.5(1)(c) of the Prevention of Corrupt Act, 1947 was registered on c 19.2.1990 against both the accused. The trial court convicted and sentenced A-1 to 2 years RI u/s 409 IPC and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/-. He was further convicted u/s 120-B, IPC as also u/s 5(2) read withs. 5(1)(c) of the 1947 Act and sentenced to one year's RI and a fine of 0 Rs.1,000/ .. under each of the two counts. A-2 was convicted u/s 120-B IPC, s. 409 IPC and s. 5(2) read with s.5(1)(c) of the 1947 Act and s. 120-B IPC and was sentenced to one year's RI and a fine of Rs.1,000/- under each of the three counts. E In the instant appeal filed by the accused, it was F primarily contended for the appellants that the 1947 Act stood repealed by the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and, therefore, the FIR under the 1947 Act could not have been lodged on 19.2.1990. Disposing of the appeals, the Court HELD: 1.1. Sub-s. (2) of s. 30 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (New Act) says that anything done G or any action taken or purported to have been done or taken under or in pursuance of the repealed Acts in so far as it is not inconsistent with the New Act, shall be deemed to have been done or taken in pursuance of the New Act. Thus, a deeming fiction is introduced so far as H action taken under the repealed Act is concerned. [para 9] [464-A-B] M.C. GUPTA v. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, 457 DEHRADUN Bansidhar & Ors. V. State of Rajasthan & Ors. 1989 (2) A SCR 152 = (1989) 2 SCC 557; and 1.T. Commissioner v. Shah Sadiq & Sons 1987 (2) SCR 942 = (1987) 3 SCC 516 - relied on 1.2 Sub-s. (2) of s.30, further, keeps the application 8 of s.6 of the GC Act intact and if a situation is not covered by s.30, resort to s.6 of the GC Act is open. Assuming that the proceedings under the Act of 1947 initiated against the appellants cannot be saved by s.30(2) of the New Act because no action was taken pursuant to the Act of 1947, c prior to coming into force of the New Act, saving clause contained in s.30 is not exhaustive. Section 6 of the GC Act can still save the proceedings. Therefore, clauses (c) and (e) of s.6 of the GC Act become relevant for the instant case. [para 10, 12-13] [464-C; 466-B-C] 0 1.3 Clause (c) of s.6 of the GC Act says that if any Central Act repeals any enactment, the repeal shall not affect any right, privilege, obligatio
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.