SAROJ ACHARYA Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been preferred against judgment dated 24.7.2001 passed by 1st Additional Sessions Judge and Special Judge under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (henceforth 'the PC Act'), Jagdalpur, District Bastar in Special Case No.4 of 1998, whereby the Appellant has been convicted and sentenced as under:

(2.) Facts of the case, in short, are that at the relevant time, the Appellant was posted as a Clerk in Establishment branch of the office of Van Mandal Adhikari, Kondagaon. Brijlal Netam, husband of Complainant Kaushalyabai (PW1) was posted there as Forest Guard. After his death, Complainant Kaushalyabai (PW1) made an application for compassionate appointment on 9.11.1995. It is alleged that thereafter the Appellant made an illegal demand of Rs.5,000 from the Complainant on the ground that she will help her in forwarding relevant Forms No.1 and No.2. Since the Complainant did not want to give money, she made a written complaint (Ex.P1) to the Superintendent of Police, Special Police Establishment, Lokayukta, Jagdalpur on 28.11.1997. Then she and her dever (brother-in-law) Tulsiram (PW2) were given a tape recorder for recording conversation. A panchnama (Ex.P2) was prepared in this regard. On 29.11.1997, the Complainant and her brother-in-law Tulsiram went to the office of the Appellant and thereafter her house. During their conversation, the Appellant demanded bribe. The whole conversation was recorded in the tape recorder. The Appellant asked the Complainant to bring the bribe money on 3.12.1997. After return, the Complainant and her brother-in-law returned the tape recorder in the office of Lokayukta. The tape recorder was seized vide Ex.P3 and a transcription of the conversation recorded in the tape recorder was prepared vide Ex.P22. On 3.12.1997, the Complainant and her brother-in-law Tulsiram went to the office of Lokayukta and submitted a written complaint (Ex.P4) and the Complainant also submitted currency notes of Rs.2,000. Panch witnesses M.S. Dhruw (PW4) and V.K. Som (PW10) were called. They verified the complaint from the Complainant. The currency notes of Rs.2,000 submitted by the Complainant were smeared with phenolphthelin powder, their numbers were noted and thereafter those notes were knotted in the saree worn by the Complainant and she was given a demonstration of the raid proceeding. In this regard, a panchnama (Ex.P5) was prepared. Thereafter, the raid party reached to Kondagaon. The Complainant and her brother-in-law went to the house of the Appellant. The panch witnesses and remaining members of the trap party stood behind at some distance. The Appellant was knitting a sweater in her house. Her sister Prema Yadav was sitting beside her. The Appellant received the bribe money in her hand and thereafter gave the same to her sister Prema Yadav for counting. Thereafter, the Appellant came out of her house for going to her office. At that time, on giving signal by Tulsiram (PW2), brother-in-law of the Complainant, the trap party went to the Appellant and caught her. On being asked, the Appellant told that the bribe money was given by her to Prema Yadav. The bribe money was recovered from Prema Yadav. Hands of Prema Yadav were washed in a solution of sodium carbonate on which colour of the solution turned into pink. The recovered currency notes were dipped into another solution of sodium carbonate on which colour of the said solution turned into pink. Numbers of the recovered currency notes were compared with the numbers already noted. The numbers matched. A transcription of the conversation took place between the Appellant and Tulsiram (PW2) was prepared vide Ex.P24. On completion of other formalities and after obtaining necessary sanction for prosecution, a charge-sheet was filed against the Appellant and co-accused Prema Yadav. The Trial Court framed charges against them.

(3.) To bring home the offence, the prosecution examined as many as 12 witnesses. Statements of the Appellant and co-accused Prema Yadav were also recorded under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. in which they denied the guilt, pleaded innocence and false implication. A defence was taken that the Complainant had come to the house of the Appellant for stay and next day her medical examination was to be done at Jagdalpur. Since the Complainant was afraid of stealing of her money there, she gave that money to the Appellant and the Appellant gave that money to her sister Prema Yadav for keeping the same in almirah. Jini Cherian alias Smt. Suman Singh (DW1) was present there at that time and she also heard the whole conversation. The Appellant had not made any demand for bribe nor had she received that money as bribe.