STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. NARSINGRAO GANGARAM PIMPLE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal by special leave is directed against a judgment dated 22/23rd January, 1976 of the Bombay High Court acquitting the respondent of the charges framed against him under Sec. 161, Indian Penal Code and also under Ss. 5 (1) (a) and 5 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'). The trial Court after very detailed consideration of the evidence held that the charges under the aforesaid sections had been fully proved and the respondent-accused was accordingly sentenced to undergo two years' rigorous imprisonment under Ss. 5 (1) (a) and 5 (2) of the Act and a fine of Rs. 2,000/- was also imposed and in default of payment of fine further six months' R. I. was imposed. The High Court in appeal disagreed with the conclusion of the trial Court, allowed the appeal of the accused, and set aside the conviction and sentence imposed on him.

(2.) We have heard Mr. Jethmalani, counsel for the respondent-accused and Mr. Rana for the appellant and have gone through the entire evidence and the judgment of the High Court.

(3.) This seems to be a very strange case where truth has been so much polluted that falsehood has taken its place and truth buried under deep debris. This has been possible by a clever police officer like the respondent, who tried to kill two birds with one stone, being seized of an opportunity which came to him through a complaint filed by Pandharinath Shivram Rege (hereinafter referred to as 'Rege') against his tenant Govind Shantaram Walawalkar (for short, to be referred to as 'Walawalkar') to the effect that the complainant suspected that his tenant, Walawalkar, was running a distillery. On a report by the police that on searching the premises no trace of distillery was found, presumably an inference could be drawn that the said complaint was false, though the said complaint was yet to be tested in a Court of law in a prosecution under Section 89 of the Bombay Prohibition Act (for facility, to be referred to as 'Prohibition Act'). The police report obviously made Rege extremely nervous for fear of impending prosecution. Rege, as his background would show, was not an ordinary man in the street but a highly educated person who had got a M. Sc. Degree and retired as a Senior Chemist before settling down in his own house called Prapanch. Therefore, being a respectable person he naturally got perturbed by the adverse police report. it was here that the accused, having got an opportunity of his life through his dice, by an ingenious device invited the complainant to offer him bribe by putting him in a tight corner on the one hand, and in an inextricable dilemma on the other.