SHANTILAL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant and one Ram Narain were tried by the Sessions Judge, Kotal for offences under Section 161 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 5 (1) (d) read with Section 5 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947. The appellant was, at the material time a clerk in the Land Record Office entrusted with the duty of furnishing certified copies of entries in land records while Ram Narain was a peon working in that office. The charge against the appellant and Ram Narain was that on or about 31st March, 1967, the appellant obtained through Ram Narain by corrupt and illegal means a sum of Rs. 10/- from Dhanna Lal as gratification, other than legal remuneration, as a motive or reward for issuing early copy of entries in the land records relating to the land of Dhanna Lal for Samvat years 2010 to 2013. The appellant and Ram Narain were both convicted by the learned Sessions Judge and each of them was sentenced to suffer one year rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 100/- or in default of payment of fine to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a further period of one month. The appellant and Ram Narain both preferred an appeal in the High Court of Rajasthan against the Order of conviction and sentence recorded against them, but the appeal substantially failed and the conviction of the appellant and Ram Narain was maintained with only a slight modification in the case of Ram Narain whose conviction was limited only to Section 5 (1) (d) read with Section 5 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947. The sentence imposed on the appellant and Ram Narain was, however reduced, the substantive sentence of imprisonment being brought down to three months' rigorous imprisonment and the sentence of fine being limited only to Rs. 50/- in case of each of them. The appellant thereupon preferred the present appeal with special leave obtained from this Court.

(2.) Before we deal with the contentions raised on behalf of the appellant in support of the appeal, it would be convenient to state briefly the facts giving rise to the prosecution against the appellant. Dhanna Lal, who was an agriculturist in a village situate in Kotal District, was in need of a certified copy of entries relating to his land as he was required to produce them for the purpose of obtaining Takavi loan from a bank. He, therefore, came down to Kotal in the evening of 28th March, 1967 and he brought with him, presumably for the purpose of assisting him as he was a stranger in Kotal. one Ram Nath, who was Panch of his village. Ram Nath and Dhanna Lal went to the Collectorate in the morning of 29th March, 1967 and there Dhanna Lal preferred an application for obtaining a certified copy of the entries to the Sadar Kanungo, but he was asked to submit the application to the clerk who was incharge of preparing certified copies. Dhanna Lal thereupon took the application to the appellant and after affixing a Court fee stamp of Rs. 2/- which represented the court fee for urgent copy, submitted it to the appellant. The appellant had his table in a room in which there were many other clerks doing work of the land record office. The appellant, after taking the application from Dhanna Lal, asked him to sit outside where-upon Dhanna Lal and Ram Nath sat in the varanda outside the room. Sometime thereafter Ram Narain, who was a peon in the office, came to Dhanna Lal and asked him what was the matter for which he had come. Dhanna Lal told Ram Narain that he had come to obtain certified copy of entries in the land Record. Ram Narain stated that without some gratification no copies were issued in the office. Dhanna Lal thereupon inquired as to how much amount would have to be paid, on which Ram Narain went inside and after sometime returned and said that about Rs. 25/- would have to be paid since Dhanna Lal wanted copy for Samvat 2010 to 2013. Dhanna Lal found this amount rather high, whereupon Ram Narain once again went inside the room and coming out after a while, he told Dhanna Lal that the clerk had stated that Rs. 10/- would be alright. Dhanna Lal expressed his inability to pay even this amount and the answer of Ram Narain was that in that event Dhanna Lal would have to wait for ten to fifteen days to get certified copy. This happened on 29th March, 1967.

(3.) On the next day i.e. on 30th March, 1967, Dhanna Lal and Ram Nath once again went to the Land Record Office in the morning and had discussion with Ram Narain, Ram Narain went inside the room and after coming out stated that certified copy of the entries would be issued on the next day if a sum of Rs. 10/- were paid. Dhanna Lal and Ram Nath thereafter left the office and while they were coming out they met a person called Sham Narain, who was known to Ram Nath. They narrated the incident in regard to the demand for bribe to Shyam Narain. Shyam Narain told them not to yield to the demand but to see him in the evening. It appears that Dhanna Lal and Ram Nath thereafter met Shyam Narain not in the evening of that day but in the morning of the next day, i.e., 31st March, 1967. Shyam Narain got an application written by Ram Nath and signed by Dhanna Lal and he asked them to go to the Deputy Superintendent, Anti-Corruption Department and to present the application to him. The Deputy Superintendent thereupon arranged a raid by going through the usual procedure of having a Panchanama of two currency notes of five-rupee each which were produced by Dhanna Lal and which were to be handed over by Dhanna Lal to Ram Narain when he demanded them. The Deputy Superintendent also arranged to secure a punch witness called Pushp Kumar. The raiding party then proceeded to the Collectorate at about 2 p.m. The Deputy Superintendent, Head Constable Uma Shankar and other policemen waited in the compound of the Land Record Office near the Tamarind tree, while Dhanna Lal, Ram Nath and Pushp Kumar proceeded to the varanda on the first floor where the room of the copying clerks was situate. Ram Narain was sitting outside the room and on seeing Dhanna Lal he said that the certified copy was ready and asked him whether he has brought the money. Dhanna Lal said that he had got the money and that Ram Narain should call the clerk and get the certified copy issued. Ram Narain thereupon called the appellant outside in the varanda and the appellant told Dhanna Lal that the certified copy was ready and that he should give the money to Ram Narain and take the certified copy. Dhanna Lal thereupon gave the two marked currency notes of five-rupee each to Ram Narain and the appellant then took Dhanna Lal inside the room and after obtaining his signature in a register handed over the certified copy to him. Dhanna Lal, after coming out, gave the agreed signal, on which the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Head Constable Uma Shankar and others ran up to the varanda. The Deputy Superintendent asked Ram Narain to produce the two five-rupee currency notes which had been give by Dhanna Lal. whereupon Ram Narain produced the two currency notes stating that he had taken them on the instructions of the appellant. The Deputy Superintendent prepared a panchanama of the seizure of the two currency notes and arrested Ram Narain. Thereafter, the case was investigated by the Deputy Superintendent of Police and after the investigation was completed, the appellant and Ram Narain were chargesheeted. This charge led to their conviction and sentence and that is how the present appeal has come before this Court.