NAV RATAN TIWARI Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 22.4.2002 passed by the 1st Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (henceforth 'the Act of 1988'), Jagdalpur, District Bastar in Special Case No.3 of 1998 convicting and sentencing the accused/Appellant as under:

(2.) Admittedly, at the relevant time, the Appellant was posted as Upper Division Clerk in the office of Block Education Officer at Farasgaon and was working as a Cashier. At that time, Complainant Laxminath Netam (PW2) was posted as Assistant Teacher at Primary School Gattipalna. As per the prosecution story, Complainant Laxminath Netam lodged a complaint (Ex.P1) to the effect that he had applied for withdrawal from his Provident Fund Account on 27.8.1997, but the Appellant, who was Upper Division Clerk in the office of Block Education Officer, Farasgaon, demanded illegal gratification of Rs. 1,000/-. On the basis of said complaint, he was handed over a tape recorder and a cassette. A panchnama (Ex.P2) was also prepared. The Complainant went with the tape recorder to the house of the Appellant. A conversation of demand of bribe was recorded in the tape recorder by the Complainant. The Appellant called the Complainant at his office with the bribe money on 8.9.1997. The Complainant submitted a written complaint (Ex.P3) along with tape recorder in which conversation between him and the Appellant was recorded. Panch witnesses Dinesh Utpreti (PW4) and B.K. Pandey (PW9) were called. They were told about the complaint. They met with the Complainant. They also listened the conversation recorded between the Complainant and the Appellant. A script (Ex.P4) of the recorded conversation was prepared. The Complainant had brought 10 notes of Rs. 100/- each which were smeared with phenolphthalein powder. Necessary instructions were given to the Complainant. A demonstration of trap was also given to him. After making complete preparation of the trap, the Complainant and the trap team went to the office of the Appellant. Trap was done and currency notes were seized from the Appellant vide Ex.P9. The trap party caught the Appellant. His hands were washed in the solution of sodium carbonate. Hands of the Complainant and B.K. Pandey, panch witness were also washed in different solutions of sodium carbonate. Colour of all the solutions turned into pink. Numbers of the recovered currency notes were compared with the numbers already noted in the preliminary panchnama. The numbers matched. Recovered notes were also dipped into a solution of sodium carbonate. Colour of the solution turned into pink. Un-numbered FIR (Ex.P13) and numbered FIR (Ex.P14) were recorded. All the solutions were sent to the FSL. FSL report is positive. Necessary sanction for prosecution was obtained vide Ex.P31 from the competent authority. On completion of the investigation, a charge-sheet was filed against the Appellant for offence punishable under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Act of 1988 followed by framing of charges against him under the same provisions.

(3.) In order to prove the guilt of the accused/Appellant, the prosecution examined as many as 12 witnesses. Statement of the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C. was also recorded in which he denied the circumstances appearing against him. He claimed to be innocent and pleaded false implication in the case. No witness has been examined in his defence.