RAM RAJA KANNOJE Vs. STATE OF MP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 20.3.1990 passed by Special Judge, Raipur, in Special Case No. 2/1986 convicting the accused/appellant for the offences punishable under Sections 5(1)(d) and 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act,1947 and Section 161 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year with fine of Rs. 500 under Section 5(1)(d) and 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and rigorous imprisonment for six months under Section 161 of the Indian Penal Code, plus default stipulations.

(2.) Case of the prosecution in brief is that on 4.6.1984 the accused/appellant was working as senior auditor in Ravi Shankar University, Raipur. Complainant namely Vijay Kumar Vahiti (PW1) was working as Assistant Professor (Junior) in the said University. It is alleged that on 14.11.1983 the complainant had gone to Varanasi for a period of one year to take higher education. However, after about six months he came back to the said University at Raipur on 14.5.1984 to complete the formalities regarding the Choudhary Pay Scale. Further case of the prosecution is that the complainant had requested one Mayaram Sapha (PW10) who was working as Lower Division Clerk for the preparation of arrears bills and the bill Ex. P6 for Rs. 450.10 and Ex. P7 for Rs. 2171.20 were prepared. These bills were sent by Mayaram Sapha (PW10) for approval to Assistant Deputy Secretary (Defence) namely S.K Shukla (PW8) who in turn forwarded the same to the accused/ appellant to pass the same for payment. At the relevant time, accused/appellant being the senior auditor was competent to do so. As per the procedure the bills once approved and passed by the senior auditor could not be cancelled or interfered with by any other officer except by that very person. The bills could be cancelled or modified by the said officer only. Case of the prosecution is that though vide bills Ex. P6 and P7 for the particular amount were passed for payment by the authorities but the said amount was not as per the full billed amount for which the complainant was entitled. As due payment was not made to the complainant, he again approached the appellant but at this time the accused/appellant demanded Rs. 50 from him to pass the bill after cancelling the earlier bills Ex. P6 and Ex. P7. The complainant was ready to pay the said amount of Rs. 50 as demanded by the accused/appellant and therefore, he cancelled the bills Ex. P6 and P7 and directed the concerned clerk to prepare the fresh bills. Thereafter, fresh bills Ex. P3 and P4 dated 24.5.1984 were prepared by Mayaram Sapha (PW10) and then as per the prescribed procedure, they were processed by the department. As the complainant was not inclined to give Rs. 50 to the accused/appellant, on 4.6.1984 he made a written complaint to the Superintendent of Police, (SPE), Raipur and when the said complaint was made, Phiranta Ram (PW9) was also present. After receiving the said written complaint S.P. (Lokayukta) authorized the Dy. S.P. to take further action thereon. Subsequently, Dy. S.P. (Lokayukta) directed one B.D. Dhananjay (PW12)-Inspector, Special Police Establishment, Raipur to proceed further. Pretrap Panchnama Ex. P2 was prepared on 4.6.1984 and M.V. Pandey (PW6) and one K.K. Upadhyaya-Area Organisers, Tribal Welfare Department were called by the department. Written complaint Ex. P1 was shown to them and the trap party was constituted. Test was demonstrated by applying phenolphthalein powder on five currency notes of 10 denomination which were given by the complainant and then the trap party went to the office of the accused/appellant at about 3 p.m. Complainant (PW1) and Phiranta Ram (PW9) entered the office of the accused/appellant and when the complainant was giving the bribe amount to the accused/appellant, he had asked him to give the same outside the office and that the said amount of Rs. 50 was handed over by him and the same was kept by the accused/appellant in the right pocket of his shirt. Thereafter, the accused/appellant again went inside the office and passed one of the bills Ex. P3 by putting the seal and signature thereon. However, when he had put his seal on the other bill Ex. P4, the trap party reached thereafter receiving the signal from Phiranta Ram (PW9) and seized the money from the pocket of his shirt worn by the accused/appellant vide Ex. P15. Phenolphthalein test was conducted which proved positive vide FSL report Ex. P19. After recording Dehati Nalisi Ex. P20, the matter was forwarded to Head Office at Bhopal for registration of the offence. After obtaining sanction order Ex. P22 and completion of all other formalities charge sheet was filed on 13.6.1986.

(3.) So as to hold the accused/appellant guilty, prosecution has examined 13 witnesses in support of its case. Statement of the accused/appellant was also recorded under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in which he denied the charges levelled against him and pleaded his innocence and false implication in the case.