Govt official sentenced till rising of court on graft charges

A government employee, who was held guilty of misappropriation while procuring dusters and tins of phenyl in 1995, has been sentenced to punishment till the rising of the court.
The sessions court modified the two-year jail term given by a magisterial court to the man, aged nearly 60 years, considering that he was ailing and had suffered the agony of trial for last 22 years.
"In the present case, the appellant/accused before me is an ailing, aged 60 years and has suffered the agony of trial for the last 22 years. He has no other case against him. The amount of misappropriation has already been paid to the Kendriya Bhandar.

"I am of the considered view that ends of justice would be subserved if substantial punishment is not awarded to the accused," Special CBI Judge Kamini Lau said.
The court sentenced the man to imprisonment "till rising of the court" and imposed a fine of Rs 20,000 on him, failing which he would have to undergo one year in jail.
The man had challenged the magisterial court's November last year's order convicting and sentencing him for the offence of criminal breach of trust by a public servant.

According to the prosecution, the man who was working as a lower division clerk in the store section of National Institute of Communicable Diseases (NICD) had received 72 dozen dusters and 300 tins of phenyl from Kendriya Bhandar in May 1995.

He, however, deposited only 36 dozen dusters in the NICD and misappropriated the remaining articles, it alleged.
The man challenged the trial court's order saying no document was produced to prove that he was responsible for the purchases to be made by NICD.
He claimed that the original bill of purchase of 72 dozen dusters and 300 tins of phenyl was not produced and photocopies cannot be read as evidence.
The judge, however, said the person who was the issuance authority appeared in the court and proved the receipts and the original bills were with the convict.
The court upheld the trial court's order saying there was no illegality or irregularity in it and also rejected his plea that he was falsely implicated in the case.