G V NANJUNDIAH Vs. STATE DELHI ADMINISTRATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment of the Delhi High Court affirming the order of conviction and sentence of the appellant passed by the Special Judge, Delhi. The appellant was convicted by the learned Special Judge under S. 161, I.P.C. and S. 5(2) read with S. 5(1)(d), Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 and sentenced to undergo a simple imprisonment for six months and pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-for the offence punishable under S. 5(2), Prevention of Corruption Act. He was also sentenced to undergo a simple imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- for the offence punishable under S. 161, I.P.C. Both the substantive sentences were directed to run concurrently.

(2.) It was a trap case and the trap was laid at:the instance of one R. S. Sharma, contractor. In July, 1972, R. S. Sharma, contractor, got a building contract for the construction of Lower Income Group Houses (Group I) in Kalkaji Colony, New Delhi. In February 1973, he. got another contract for the construction of Lower Income Group Houses (Group II). Both the contracts were under the Housing Division of the Delhi Development Authority. He had also to execute some additional works. The prosecution case, as unfolded by Mr. Sharma, the contractor, was that the appellant, Shri Nanjundiah, Executive Engineer of the Housing Division, was not making payment to the contractor of Rupees one lakh deducted by way of security from his running bills. It was alleged that there was delay in payment to him for additional items of works executed by him and for that the appellant was also responsible. The case of the contractor was that he asked Shri Nanjundiah on three/four occasions to release the security amount and to sanction the amount due on account of extra items of works done by him. He submitted the copy of the guarantee bond along with his application on Oct. 17, 1973 personally to the appellant, but the appellant did not get the amount of security released in his favour. The contractor alleged that he had met the accused Nanjundiah on Oct. 30, 1973 in his office in the DDA building at Ring Road accompanied by his son U. S. Sharma. It was alleged that the appellant asked for an illegal gratification of Rs. 5,000/- from the contractor for getting his work done. Ultimately, it was settled that the contractor would pay a sum of Rs. 2,500/- to the appellant at his house at 7.00 p.m. on that day and the balance of Rs. 2,500/- was to be paid later after the refund to the contractor of the security amount of Rupees one lakh and payment to him on account of extra items.

(3.) It was the case of the contractor that from the office of the appellant he went to the Syndicate Bank and encashed a cheque for Rs. 2,500/- consisting of twentyfive currency notes of rupees one hundred each. He also got a certificate from the Manager of the Bank as to the encashment of the cheque mentioning particularly the numbers of the currency notes issued to him. With the said amount of Rs. 2,500/- the contractor and his son went to the Central Bureau of Investigation and met the Superintendent of Police. They filed a complaint to the Superintendent of Police' who referred the matter to the Deputy Superintendent of Police, C.B.I. After going through the contents of the complaint, the Deputy Superintendent of Police called two independent witnesses - Shri R. L. Verma and Shri R. N. Khanna. A memorandum was prepared by the Deputy Superintendent of Police wherein the numbers of the currency notes were noted. The currency notes were treated with phenolphthalein powder. The plan, as recorded in the said memorandum was that the currency notes would be given to the appellant on demand in the presence of Verma. Thereafter, the contractor would give a signal by coughing loudly.