DARIYAV SINGH VASHISHTHA Vs. STATE OF C G

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 24th July, 2001 passed by learned Special Judge (Prevention of Corruption Act) and 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Durg, in Special Criminal Case No. 3/2000, whereby and whereunder the learned trial Court, after holding the Appellant guilty of commission of offence under Sections 7, 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as "'the Act of 1988") has sentenced him to undergo R.I. for 5 years with fine of Rs. 2000/- and in default of payment of fine, additional R.I. for 6 months for each of the offences, directing both the sentences to run concurrently.

(2.) Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the Appellant was posted as Assistant Sub Inspector in Krishi Upaj Mandi, Dondi, District-Durg. The Appellant demanded bribe of Rs. 1,000/- from complainant -Derha Ram for renewal of licence and disposal of notice issued to him, which the complainant did not want to give. Therefore, he submitted a compliant dated 7.12.1998 (Annexure P-19) in the office of Special Police Establishment, Lokayukt, Raipur. For verification of complaint, a micro tape recorder was given to the complainant and a panchnama in Ex.P-20 was prepared. Complainant was instructed to record conversation. Further case of the prosecution is that on 8.12.1998, complainant met the Appellant and conversation regarding bribe took place. The complainant was asked by the Appellant to bring Rs. 1,000/-. The recorded tape was submitted along with the complaint on 8.12.1998 (Ex.P-9). A transcript in Ex.P-7 was prepared in the presence of panch witnesses and micro cassette was seized vide Ex.P-8. On the basis of the application dated 8.12.1998 (Ex.P-9), first information report, Ex.P-21, was recorded at 0.98 hrs. on 9.12.1998. On 9.12.1998, complainant presented 10 currency notes, each of denomination of Rs. 100/-. Phenolphthalein powder was smeared on the currency notes by Shyam Sunder (P.W.3) and the currency notes were kept in the left pocket of the complainant and he was instructed to give the money on demand and give signal. He was explained regarding the reaction of sodium carbonate solution and phenolphthalein powder and the solution after demonstration was sealed. A preliminary panchnama was prepared in Ex.P-12 and the sealed bottle was seized in Ex.P-10. Thereafter, a team was formed. The Trap Team proceeded for Dondi. At that time, the Appellant had gone home for lunch. After some time, Appellant came to the Krishi Upaj Mandi (for short "the Mandi") office and thereafter the complainant approached the Appellant. It is the case of the prosecution that the Appellant demanded bribe of Rs. 1,000/-, whereafter, the complainant gave the bribed money to the Appellant which was kept by the Appellant in the left pocket of his shirt. Thereafter, upon receipt of signal from the complainant. Trap Team surrounded the Appellant. Pawan Kumar Pathak (P.W.10) prepared sodium carbonate solution, in which, hands of the Appellant were washed, upon which, colour of the solution turned pink. Hands of the complainant Derha Ram were also washed, which also turned pink. The seized currency notes were also dipped in the sodium carbonate solution, which also turned pink. The shirt of the Appellant was also dipped in the solution and the colour turned pink. Sodium carbonate solution was separately sealed vide Ex.P-15. Currency notes were sealed and seized vide Ex.P-14 by J.S. Jangi (P.W.12). Receipt book and diary concerning the case of the complainant were seized vide Ex.P-16. Note sheets, licence registered produced by Secretary-Balram were seized vide Ex.P-1. A panchnama of trap proceedings was prepared in Ex.P-17 at the spot. Seized articles were taken to the Forensic Science Laboratory (F.S.L.) by constable Tilakram Gakre (P.W.6) under memo of Ex.P-4. Report in Ex.P-6 was received from F.S.L. Thereafter, first information report was lodged in Ex.P-18. Sanction for prosecuting the Appellant was obtained in Ex.P-2.

(3.) After completion of usual investigation, the prosecution filed charge sheet. On the basis of the material in the charge sheet, charges under Sections 7, 13(1) (d) read with Section 13(2) of the Act of 1988 were framed against the Appellant. The Appellant abjured gilt. In order to prove its case, the prosecution examined Vijay Kumar Thakur (P.W.1), Sanjay Kaul (P.W.2), Shyamsunder Rao (P.W.3), Balram Prasad Gupta (P.W.4), Rupram Verma (P.W.5), Tilakram Gakre (P.W.6), Ravikishore Nashine (P.W.7), Sunil Kumar Agre (P.W.8), Dauram Verma (P.W.9). Pawan Kumar Pathak (P.W. 10), Complainant- Derha Ram (P.W.11) and Inspector -J.S. Jangi (P.W.12).