State preferred criminal appeal against acquittal of railway official accused of permitting unauthorized AC travel. High Court found no material evidence showing respondent received bribe. Acquittal confirmed and appeal dismissed.
Order of acquittal dated 27.04.2005 confirmed and criminal appeal dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HON’BLE MR JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO
Criminal Appeal No.1541 OF 2006
DATED: 27.09.2011
BETWEEN: State of A.P. rep.by the Public Prosecutor .. Appellant And Vinayakam Sekhar
.. Respondent/accused
HON’BLE MR JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO
Criminal Appeal No.1541 OF 2006
JUDGMENT:
This criminal appeal is filed against the judgment dated 27.04.2005 passed by the VII Metropolitan Magistrate for Railways, Vijayawada in C.C.No.8 of 2005 for the offence punishable under Sections 173 and 146 of the Indian Railways Act, 2003.
2. Aggrieved by the order of acquittal passed by the learned VII Metropolitan Magistrate for Railways, the State preferred the present appeal.
3. I have heard the learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the State and Sri M.V.Surender Reddy, learned counsel appearing for the respondent/accused.
4. The respondent was working as Chief Travelling Ticket Examiner in railways on the relevant date. The Vigilance Inspectors Squad, Railwlay Board, New Delhi on 28.09.2004 at about 4.25 AM detained a passenger by name Mr S.V.Ganesh Kumar, PW5 while he was getting down from the AC coach in Train No.2621-Tamil Nadu Express from Madras to Vijayawada on Plot-form No.6 of Vijayawada Railway Station. PW.5 produced only a sleeper class ticket and revealed before the squad that he paid an amount of Rs.350/- and that the respondent, who was Chief Travelling Ticket Examiner permitted him to travel in AC coach. Subsequently basing on the report of PW.1, the Sub-Inspector, R.P.F. registered a case against the respondent alleging commission of offences
punishable under Sections 173 and 146 of the Indian Railways Act, 2003. After completing investigation, a charge sheet was filed against the respondent and he was tried by the learned Magistrate for the said offences.
5. In the course of the trial before the learned Magistrate, the prosecution in order to establish the guilt of the accused, examined Pws.1 to 11 and marked Exs.P.1 to P.16. The learned Magistrate upon thoroughly considering the entire evidence on record and on hearing both sides, acquitted the respondent/accused for the offences under Sections 173 and 146 of the Indian Railways Act, 2003, against which the present appeal is preferred by the State.
6. Now the point for determination in this appeal is whether there are any valid grounds to interfere with the order of acquittal passed by the learned Magistrate?
7. Except the oral testimony of the railway officials, there is no material on record to show that PW5 was traveling in AC coach by only purchasing sleeper class ticket. PW.5 was apprehended by the investigating officer and he was cited as one of the witnesses of the prosecution, but the said ticket was not seized from PW.5. It is rightly held by the learned trial Court that it is not much difficult for the investigating agency to produce the ticket of PW5 into the Court or at least any other evidence with the railway department showing that PW.5 purchased only sleeper class ticket nor any additional amount was seized from the respondent.
8. PW.5 who allegedly travelled in the AC coach having only a ticket of sleeper class, did not support the prosecution version. PWs.7 and 8, the passengers also did not support the prosecution version. Therefore, the entire case rests on the evidence of officials of
railway department and investigating officer. In the absence of any documentary proof or any convincing legal evidence showing that the respondent received bribe from PW.5 and permitted him to travel in the AC coach, no criminal liability can be fastened on the respondent. The learned trial Court rightly acquitted the respondent considering the fact that there was no legal evidence to permit PW-5 to travel in the A.C. coach. The order of acquittal passed by the learned Magistrate does not call for any interference in this appeal.
8. For the aforementioned reasons, the order of acquittal dated 27.04.2005 passed by the VII Metropolitan Magistrate for Railways, Vijayawada in C.C.No.8 of 2005 is confirmed and the appeal preferred by the State is dismissed.
__________________ Date: 27.09.2011 R. KANTHA RAO, J
Kvrm
HON’BLE MR JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO
Criminal Appeal No.1541 OF 2006
DATE: 27.09.2011
1 issue framed by the court
Whether there are valid grounds to interfere with the order of acquittal passed by the trial court in favour of the respondent.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
State of A.P. rep.by the Public Prosecutor
Vinayakam Sekhar
R. Kant Rao
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
