LILABEN Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT
LAWS(GJH)-2015-5-94
HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
Decided on May 04,2015

LILABEN Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF GUJARAT Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

M K HARSHAN VS. STATE OF KERALA [REFERRED TO]
SATVIR SINGH VS. STATE OF DELHI [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

- (1.)The present appeal has been filed by the appellant-accused under Section 374 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as ' the Code' (for short) against the judgment and order of conviction dated 7-1-2004 passed by learned Additional Special Judge and Second Fast Track Judge, Amreli in Special Case No. 46 of 1995, whereby the appellant-accused was convicted of the charge for offence punishable under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as ' the Act' ( for short) and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for one year with fine of Rs.5,000/- and in default, to further undergo simple imprisonment of three months and also the appellant-accused was also convicted for offence under Section 13 (2) of the Act and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for three months with fine of Rs.15,000/- and in default, to further undergo simple imprisonment for six months. The sentences were ordered to run concurrently.
(2.)The brief facts of the prosecution case are that while the appellant-accused was working as Gynaecologist with Amreli Civil Hospital, being employed by the Department of Health and Medical Education, one Madhuben wife of Manubhai Hiraiya residing at Village Varruli, Taluka and District Amreli had conceived and developed foetus of about 4 1/2 months and on sonography test, it was revealed that the said foetus conceived by Madhuben was a female child and as she had already four daughters and as she was not inclined to give birth to another female child, she along with her husband had gone to Amreli Civil Hospital on 6-1-1995 for the purpose of abortion. That she had got her case registered which was numbered as Case No.728 and it was the case of the prosecution that she was examined by the present appellant-accused and said Madhuben stated the aforesaid facts and disclosed her with for abortion. It is the case of the prosecution that the appellant-accused, after examining said Madhuben, told her to give Rs.500/- towards fees first in time and also informed that the expenses for the medicines shall be additional expenses. It is the case of the prosecution that said Madhuben had told the appellant-accused that in the Government Hospital, the fees is not to be paid and moreover, she did not have Rs.500/-, and therefore, according to the prosecution, the appellant had insisted on payment of Rs. 500/- and also informed that the expenses of medicines shall be extra and as such, five months pregnancy is likely to get over soon and there was also the danger in the operation, and therefore, said Madhuben should arrange for the funds immediately and after which the appellant would give her the treatment, but no treatment would be given without money. It is the case of the prosecution that the appellant was having her duties on Wednesdays and Friday of every week and said Madhuben was informed to come on either of these two days. It is the further case of the prosecution that after consulting the appellant, said Madhuben came out from the hospital and informed her husband of the talk that she had with the appellant. It is in view of these facts, as alleged by the prosecution that said Madhuben and her husband who were not inclined to make the payment of Rs. 500/- and moreover, they did not have that amount to make the payment, both of them went to the office of Anti Corruption Bureau at Amreli and disclosed the complaint on 12-1-1995 before the Police Inspector Shri R.G. Patil. Thereafter, Shri Patil of ACB arranged for two panchas. The complainant and members of raiding parties were introduced to the panch witnesses. After the following necessary procedure, the aforesaid aspect was verified and a trap was arranged, wherein the accused-appellant herein was caught red-handed.
(3.)After completion of the investigation, the charge-sheet was filed before the learned Additional Special Judge and Second Fast Track Court Judge, Amreli, which was, thereafter, numbered as Special Case No. 46 of 1995.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.