BRAHMA NAND Vs. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two Appeals have been preferred against a common Judgment dated 3 rd February, 2004, whereby the Appellants were convicted under Section 7 and 13(1) (d) read with Section 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as "P.C. Act" for short) and Order on the Point of Sentence dated 7 th February, 2004, whereby they were sentenced to undergo 18 months Rigorous Imprisonment on each count and to pay a fine of ' 5,000/- on each count.

(2.) Facts leading to conviction of the two appellants are that Smt. Jaipali was working as a safai karamchari (Sweeper) in M.C.D. She retired on 30 th September, 1993. Her dues after her retirement were to be paid to her. Appellant Brahma Nand was U.D.C. working in Shahdara Zone, MCD, where Jaipali used to work as Sweeper. In her complaint she reported that Brahma Nand was responsible for payment of post retirement dues to her. She was forced to lodge a complaint Ex. PW2/A with CBI when appellant Brahma Nand persisted that she cannot get cheques of post retirement dues "free" and she would have to pay bribe for these cheques. She was given a cheque of ' 15,000/- about 15-20 days prior to making of complaint and for giving that cheque of ' 15,000/-, Brahma Nand had already taken from her ' 1500/-. Since she had to receive more amount against her retirement dues and more cheques were to be handed over to her, Brahma Nand was asking bribe. She had visited office several times and every time Brahma Nand would tell her that she should being money and then take cheques. On 25 th November, 1993, she went to Brahma Nand with her grandson Bhagat Singh (in distant relation) and Brahma Nand asked her to come on 26 th November, 1993 at 9.30 am with ' 1,000/- and told her that he would issue cheques only thereafter. She was compelled to lodge the report because of this. She had no enmity with Brahma Nand or any of his colleagues nor she had any other financial transaction with Brahma Nand. She had approached police with her grandson as she was weak and aged, and was not able to talk properly. At the time of lodging report, she had taken ' 1,000/- with her.

(3.) After recording this report, an Inspector of Anti Corruption Branch (ACB) prepared pre-raid proceedings, called a punch witness, noted the "number" of currency notes brought by the complainant and applied phenolphthalein powder on them, demonstrated to the witness how phenolphthalein powder worked and sent the punch witness along with complainant and her grandson to the office of accused. Punch witness was told to give signal after the bribe was accepted. Jaipali went to the office of appellant Brahma Nand. Appellant Bijender Kumar was sitting opposite him and the amount of ' 1,000/-, at the instance of Brahma Nand, was taken by Bijender Kumar from Jaipali. Immediately signal was given to the raiding party and both the appellants were apprehended and post raid proceedings were carried out. Hand wash to Bijender Kumar was taken by the Inspector and was sealed. After completion of investigation, the accused persons were sent for trial.