LexM. NARAYANAN NAMBIAR versus STATE OF KERALA
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
724 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1963] SUPP.
19•2
M. NARAYANAN NAMBIAR
ti.
STATE OF KERALA
{S. J. IMAM, K. SUJJBA RAO, N. lU.TAGOPALA
AYYANGAR and J. R. MuoHOLKAR, JJ.)
Prevention of
Corruption-Public aervanl-Abuae of
official po8ition-Violalion of principle• of natural jualice-
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 (2 of 1947), s. 5 (1) (d).
The appellant was convicted under s. 5 (l)(d) of the Pre-
vention of Corruption Act, 1947, on the ground that by abusing
his position as a puhlk servant he obtained an assignment of
Government land in the name of his brother-in-law without
revealing the relationship and by undervaluing the trees 1tand·
ing on the land. The High Court on appeal directed that a
statement showing the value of the timber calculated on the
basis contended by the appellant may be submitted by either
of the parties. The appellant did not file any statement but a
statement was filed on behalf of the prosecution. The High
Court without giving ·an opportunity to the appellant to file
objections to the correctness of the report and the reliability of
the statement filed by the prosecution relied upon the statement
to come to the conclusion that there had been an under-valua·
tion by the appellant. It was contended thats. 5(l)(d) did
not apply to the case and that before the High Court there had
been a failure of natural justice.
Htld, that a penal statute must be construed strictly and
only such thing< arc offences as come within not merely the
letter but also the spirit of the statute.
Dyle. v. Elliot, (1872) L.R. 4 P.C. 184, referred to.
He/,d, further, that considering the object and scope of the
Prcvtntion of Corr11ptio11 Act, 1947, the expression 'otherwise'
ins. 5 (l)(d) is emp!oycd to bring i11 eve;t abll'!'. of official
position by a pubhc servant. But the JUX!aposttmn of the
word 'otherwise' with the WC.,rds 'corrupt' or 'illegal means'
and the fact that dishonesty is implicit in the word •abuse',
indicate the necessity for a dishonest intention as an ingredient
of the offence and innocuous a~t~ wi/) nvt l>c covel'Cd by the
.aid clau'f:,
' I
2 S.C.R.
SUPREME COURT REPOR'i's
725
Held, further, that the spirit of the Act which is in accord
with the words used therein is to take in every form of corrup-
tion, and the facts in the instant case if established constitute
an offence under s. 5(l)(d).
Ram Kriahna v. State of Delhi, [1956] S.C.R. 182 and
Dlianuhwar Narain Saxcna v. Dellii Adminiatration, [1962] 3
S.C.R. 259, referred to.
Held, also that before the High C'.ourt, there had been
violation of the principles of natural justice and that the matter
had to go back to the High Court for the appellant being given
an opportunity to meet the material put in by the prosecution
before the High Court.
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal
Appeal No. 155 of 1961.
Appeal by special leave from the judgment
and order dated April 10, 1961 of the Kerala High
Court in Criminal Appeal No. 143 of 1960.
B . .R. L. Iyengar and T. S. Venkataraman, for
the appellant.
V. Narayana Menon and Sardar Bahadur, for
the respondent.
1962. December 5. The Judgment of the Court
was delivered by
1961
M. Nu•fllWI
./taNMr
v.
Stale of K1ralo
SUBBA R.Ao, J .-This appeal by special leave
Sub/la R .. ,J,
is preferred against the judgment of the High Court
of Kerala, confirming that of the Special Judge,
Trivandrum, convicting the accused under s, 5(2),
read withs. 5(1) (d) of the Prevention of Corruption
Act, 1947, (2 of 1947), hereafter called the Act, and
sentencing him to pay a fine of Rs. l,OOOj-, or in
default to undergo · simple imprisonment for four
months.
The appellant. was a Special Revenue Inspector
for land assignment at Manantoddy in Wynad Talu~
in the old Malabar district.
1962
M. Narayanan
Nambi1r
v.
Slate of Kera/a
Subba Rao, J.
726 SUPREME COUR.'I' REPORTS [1963] SUPP.
The case of the prosecution was that he, by
abusing his position as a public servant, got 4 acres
and 80 cents of Government land in R. S. No. 376/2
of Tavinhal village assigned in the name of his
brother-in-law P. V. Gopinathan Nambiar without
revealing the fact that he was his brother-in~law and
by making false entries in the relevant records show·
ing that the said land contained only 97 trees valued
at Rs. 165/-, whereas the land had actually 150 trees
worth Rs. 1450/·. The suppression of the fact that
the assignee was his brother-in-law and the under-
estExcerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.