SUMAN KUMAR GUPTA Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant has preferred this appeal against the judgment and order dated 15-3-1997 passed by Special Judge, Raipur in Special Case No. 30/1992 convicting the accused/appellant under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read with 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year with fine of Rs. 1000 on each count, plus default stipulations. Case of the prosecution in brief is that at the relevant time the accused/appellant was working as Assistant Surgeon in Primary Health Centre, Dharsiwa. On 6-11-1987 complainant Chintaram (PW-9) made an application Ex. P-1 before S.P. (Lokayukta), Raipur stating that accused/appellant had demanded Rs. 500 for giving favourable report of Netram and Lalaram so that he may not be prosecuted. It is mentioned in the said application that ultimately the appellant agreed to give the favourable report for Rs. 100 and he asked the complainant to come with that amount on 6-11-1987 itself at his residence. However, the complainant did not want to give the amount demanded by the accused/appellant and wanted an action to be taken against him. On that day itself, J.L. Sharma (PW-11)-Deputy Superintendent of Police, Special Police Establishment, Lokayukta, Raipur verified the said complaint and made an endorsement that it appeared to be genuine. Preliminary Panchnama Ex. P-2 was prepared in the office of J.L. Sharma (PW-11) and thereafter the trap party proceeded to the residence of the appellant at Dharsiwa from Raipur. It is alleged that complainant Chintaram and Panch witness H.H. Pal (PW-5) entered the house of the appellant and gave Rs. 100 to him as bribe. After receiving the signal, trap party headed by J.L. Sharma (PW-11) entered the house of the appellant and caught him. It is alleged that one currency note of Rs. 100 was lying on the floor seizure of which was made vide Ex. P-3 and thereafter post trap Panchnama Ex. P-4 was prepared. Phenolphthalein test was conducted which was found positive. Thereafter, Dehati Nalisi Ex. P-9 was recorded for the offences under sections 5(1)(d) and 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and Section 161 IPC and based on this, FIR Ex. P-12A was registered FSL report Ex. P-12 was received and sanction to prosecute the appellant was obtained on 18-8-1992 vide Ex. P-7. After investigation, challan was filed by the police on 3-11-1992 and the Court below framed the charge on 12-1-1993.

(2.) In support of its case, the prosecution has examined as many as 12 witnesses. Statement of the accused/appellant was also recorded under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in which he denied the allegations made against him and pleaded his innocence and false implication in the case. This apart, one T.K. Agrawal (DW-1) has also been examined by the defence in support of its case.

(3.) After hearing the parties, the Court below convicted and sentenced the accused/appellant as mentioned in paragraph No. 1 of this judgment.