BRAHAM SINGH BHATI Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal of Braham Singh Bhati is directed against the impugned judgment dated 16.03.2010 and consequent order on sentence dated 17.03.2010 passed by the Special Judge, Delhi in Corruption Case No.31/05 FIR No.54/04 P.S. Anti Corruption Branch, whereby the appellant has been convicted for the offences punishable under Section 7 and 13(1)(d) read Section 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and sentenced under Section 7 of the P.C. Act to undergo RI for the period of 1? years and a fine of `5,000/-, in default of payment of fine to undergo SI for the period of four months. Similar sentence has also been awarded to the appellant for the offence under Section 13(2) of the P.C. Act, 1988 with the observation that both the sentences shall run concurrently.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated, case of the prosecution is that in October, 2004, appellant Braham Singh Bhati was working as LDC in the Office of SDM, Geeta Colony, Delhi. Complainant Om Prakash (PW5) had submitted applications of his sister Birmati and brother-in-law Vijay in the office of SDM, Election requesting for issue of voter certificates in their favour. On 12.10.2004, complainant Om Prakash met the appellant in that connection and the appellant demanded a bribe of `200/- and a bottle of liquor for issuing the certificate. The complainant told the appellant that he would come to collect the certificate on the next day and on this, the appellant told him that in case he was not available in the office on 13.10.2004, the complainant may collect the certificate from Bhopal Singh, who was also working in the office, after paying him the bribe money. The complainant was not interested in giving illegal gratification. He went to Anti Corruption Branch and submitted his complaint Ex.PW5/A.

(3.) AT about 2:30 pm, complainant and panch witness came out of the office and told the raid officer that the appellant was not available in the office and he would come after one hour. Raid officer advised them to wait for the appellant. Complainant and panch witness again went inside Room No.4 of SDM office. AT about 3:30 pm, panch witness gave pre-determined signal and on this, the raid officer along with his team rushed into Room No.4. Appellant Braham Singh was present in the room. Panch witness informed him that the appellant had demanded and accepted `200/- from the complainant and the money was in his right fist. The raid officer challenged the appellant that he has taken illegal gratification of `200/- and offered his search as well as search of other members of the party. The appellant declined the offer and admitted his guilt. On the direction of raid officer, panch witness recovered the bribe money of `200/- of two GC notes of `100/- denomination each from the right hand fist of the appellant. On comparison, the numbers of the recovered GC notes tallied with the numbers recorded in pre-raid report Ex.PW5/B. Those GC notes were taken into possession vide Memo Ex.PW5/6. Sodium carbonate solution was prepared and the appellant was asked to put his right hand in said colourless solution. The right hand wash of the appellant turned pink and the said pink solution was transferred into two clean bottles and sealed with the seal of "SS". The bottles were labelled as RHW-I-II. Raid officer prepared the sample seal and the said two sealed bottled as well as sample solutions were taken into possession vide Memo Ex.PW5/D. Raid officer further prepared post raid proceedings Ex.PW5/E as well as rukka Ex.PW14/A, which was sent to the Police Station through Constable Kishan Pal for the registration of the FIR.