IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.697 OF 2000

Lalu Sakharam Rathod        ...Appellant(s)

Versus

State of Maharashtra       ...Respondent(s)

O  R  D  E  R

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Trial Court convicted the appellant under Section 7 read with Section 13

(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 [hereinafter referred to as “the Act”]

and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months and

to  pay  fine  of  Rupees  five  hundred;  in  default,  to  undergo  further  rigorous

imprisonment for a period of two months.  He was further convicted under Section 13

(2) of the Act and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one

year and to pay fine of Rupees one thousand; in default, to undergo further rigorous

imprisonment for a period three months.  Both the sentences, however, were ordered

to  run  concurrently.   On  appeal  being  preferred,  High  Court  confirmed  the

convictions.  Hence, this appeal by special leave.

...2/-

- 2 -  

Having  heard  learned  counsel  appearing  on  behalf  of  the  parties  and

perused the records, we are of the view that the Trial Court as well as the High Court

have recorded convictions of the appellant upon threadbare discussion of evidence

and no interference by this Court is called for.

The appeal, accordingly, fails and the same is dismissed.

Bail bonds of the appellant, who is on bail, are cancelled and he is directed

to be taken into custody forthwith to serve out the remaining period of sentence for

which  the  matter  shall  be  reported  to  this  Court  by  the  Trial  Court  within  two

months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

......................J.       [B.N. AGRAWAL]

......................J.       [G.S. SINGHVI]

......................J.       [AFTAB ALAM]

New Delhi, November 06, 2008.