ANUP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA Vs. STATE THR. CBI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) VIDE impugned order of 8th November, 2012 petitioner alongwith 1. his co -accused has been charged for committing offences under Section 120 -B of IPC read with Sections 7, 12 and 13 (2) read with Section 13 (1) (d) of The Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

(2.) PETITIONER was Commissioner (Excise), Delhi who had purportedly conspired with his co -accused -Lallan [Superintendent (Central Excise), New Delhi] and one Hemant Gandhi in getting illegal raid conducted on 28th December, 2011 at the premises of co -accused -Dalip Aggarwal and Anand Aggarwal to obtain bribe of Rs.60 lac. On basis of source information, a trap was laid on 2nd January, 2012 at the parking of the office of Lallan, Superintendent (Central Excise), New Delhi where an amount of Rs.3 lac had been kept by one Dalip Kumar, driver of aforesaid Superintendent (Central Excise) in a car (which was registered in the name of wife of Superintendent -Lallan) and in the presence of two independent witnesses, the aforesaid bribe amount was recovered.

(3.) SO far as petitioner is concerned, in the charge -sheet filed, it is alleged that at the request of A -3, petitioner (A -1) had deputed A -2 for conducting illegal raid at the premises of A -5 and A -3 kept petitioner (A - 1) informed telephonically about the recoveries made during the search, the success of mission and about amount of illegal gratification in cryptic language by saying "mission successful" and "six zero" and petitioner (A -1) acknowledged the same by saying "OK". In the charge - sheet filed, the sum and substance of the call details has been spelt out and with the aid of Section 120 -B of IPC, petitioner is sought to be prosecuted in this case.