Leave granted.
We have heard the learned counsel for the
parties.
We are indeed disturbed by some of the
observations made by the High Court. The accused-
respondent was acquitted by the trial court for
offences punishable under the Prevention of Corruption
Act, 1947 and sentenced to term of imprisonment. An
appeal was thereafter filed in the High Court by the
State and the High Court set aside the acquittal of the
accused (para 30) but at the same time held as under:-
“The result, following the judgments
of this Court rendered in State by Food
Inspector v. Kumaresan (1992) LAW WEEKLY
(CRL.) 782 and considering the facts that
the offences are related to the year 1989
for which case was registered in regular
case No. 10/A/91 on 28.2.1991 by P.W. 12,
the Inspector of Police on Instruction by
the Superintendent of Police and the case
ended in acquittal as per judgment the
mental agony suffered by the
respondents/assured, this court is of the
view that the acquittal of the accused need
not be disturbed. Accordingly, this appeal
is disposed of.”
On the face of it, the observations in the
aforesaid paragraphs cannot be reconciled. We,
accordingly, allow this appeal, set aside the order of
the High Court dated 04.04.2006 and remit the matter to
the High Court for decision afresh in accordance with
law. As the matter is pending since the year 1989, we
would request the High court to dispose of the matter
as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period
of three months from the date of communication of this
order.