KRISHNA RAM Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises out of the judgment and order dated 22.12.2000 passed by the High Court of Rajasthan, Bench at Jodhpur in S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 673 of 1999 by which the learned single Judge of the High Court has set aside the order of acquittal of the accused and convicted him for offences under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (for short "P.C. Act, 1988") and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.500/-. In default of payment of fine, the accused shall suffer further simple imprisonment for two months.

(2.) Brief facts, which led to the trial of the accused, are as under :- Krishna Ram-accused-appellant herein in the year 1991 was posted as Patwari and was Incharge of the Revenue Circle 84 RBB Tehsil Raisinghnagar, District Sri Ganganagar. On 20.03.1991, Gurmukh Singh-complainant (PW-2), resident of 85, RB visited the Rajasthan State Investigation Bureau (SB) Ganganagar Post and submitted an application to Hazari Lal (PW-8), Inspector Chowki Incharge in which he stated that he was holder of land measuring 10 bighas 5 biswas in Chak 85 RB and land measuring 12.5 bighas in Lakha Tiba on the basis of temporary cultivation lease. He wanted to convert his temporary lease into permanent lease for which purpose he filled in the requisite application form (Exhibit P7) and presented the same before Shri Jagmal Singh (PW-9), the Sub-Divisional Officer, Raisinghnagar, who in turn marked it to the Tehsildar, Raisinghnagar and handed over the original application to the complainant. The Tehsildar in turn marked the application to the Patwari concerned. On 18.03.1991, PW-2 approached the appellant (Patwari) and presented the application (Ex.-P-7) to him for giving his report thereon. The complainant alleged that the appellant had demanded a sum of Rs. 1,000/- as bribe money for giving favourable report in his (complaints) favour in regard to allotment of the lands to him on permanent lease holders rights. PW-2 pleaded to the appellant that he did not possess enough money to meet his demand whereupon the appellant asked the complainant to come to his house with an amount of Rs. 500/- instead of Rs. 1,000/-as demanded by him on an earlier occasion. It was also stated by the complainant that he was not willing to pay the bribe money to the appellant and wanted to get him apprehended by the police for demanding illegal gratification and it was with that sole object that the complaint (Ex. P-13) came to be presented to PW-8 Hazari Lal-Inspector, Bureau Incharge of Chowki, Ganganagar. On receipt of the complaint of the complainant, PW-8 summoned Askaran (PW-1) and Raje Ram (PW-3) employees of UIT, Ganganagar, who were introduced to the complainant and they were apprised of complete gist of the complaint. Both the witnesses had voluntarily agreed to participate in the trap proceedings proposed to be laid against the appellant. Four currency notes of Rs. 100/- denomination and two notes of Rs. 50/- denomination, i.e. total amounting to Rs. 500/-, were arranged by the complainant for payment to the appellant. The Bureau employees then treated the currency notes with phenolphthalein powder which were kept in the left side pocket of the complainant's shirt who was instructed not to touch the money any more and the same shall be handed over to the appellant on his demand. The complainant was asked to give a signal to the members of the trapping party soon after payment of money to the appellant by putting his hand on his turban. The witnesses were also instructed to stand close by to the complainant to enable the police party to apprehend the appellant red handed. Thereafter, the trapping party reached near Gulbadiwali Haveli at Raisinghnagar where the appellant was residing. The appellant at that time was sitting with two or three persons in his house, but the complainant asked him to come outside the room on the first floor of the house and the members of the trapping party remained standing downstairs. Thereafter, upon signal being received from the complainant, the members of the trapping party immediately reached near to the appellant where PW-8 questioned him in the presence of the witnesses present there if he had accepted Rs. 500/- as bribe from complainant Gurmukh Singh. The appellant's first stand was that Gurmukh Singh had given him Rs. 500/- for making a favourable report on his application for allotment of land to him, but then hesitatingly he turned around and replied that Rs. 500/- was paid to him as loan amount. The complainant reiterated and reasserted that on demand made by the appellant, he had given Rs. 500/- as an illegal gratification to the appellant for doing his work. He stated that the appellant had accepted the amount and after counting the currency notes he pocketed them in left side pocket of his bushirt. The police constable immediately held both the wrists of the appellant and that appellant's hands turned pink when dipped in sodium carbonate solution, as a result whereof the solution also turned pink colour. The appellant was asked to take out the money from the pocket of his bushirt and on counting the currency notes they were found to be the same which were paid by the complainant to the appellant. On personal search of the appellant, a sum of Rs. 227/- was also found in his pocket, besides Rs. 500/- the bribe money. The bushirt of the appellant was dipped in the solution of sodium carbonate which also turned into pink colour and was taken into possession as an evidence. The relevant record was also taken in possession from the appellant. Site Plan was prepared after conducting search of the room occupied by the appellant. The materials seized as evidence were kept in the Malkhana. FIR (Ex. P-16) was prepared and registered against the appellant in the police station at Head Office at Jaipur. The sample bottles were sent to Forensic Laboratory, Jaipur, and on receipt of the report (Exhibit P-17) and after completion of all the required formalities, charge sheet was presented against the appellant in the court. The appellant during the trial denied the charges and claimed to be tried. The prosecution examined as many as ten witnesses and produced 19 documents and 12 articles as exhibits. The appellant in his statement recorded under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 denied his involvement in the commission of the offence. He pleaded that there was some dispute regarding felling of a tree from the field of one Gorai which on spot inspection of the appellant was found lying in the field of the complainant and, therefore, it was in this background that an attempt was made by the complainant to involve the appellant in a false case. He, examined Ramchandra (DW-1) in his defence and got two documents exhibited as D-1 and D-2.

(3.) Learned trial Judge, on analysis of the entire oral and documentary evidence on record, found the appellant not guilty of the charges under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the P.C. Act, 1988 and accordingly acquitted him.