BABU RAM Vs. CBI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application under Section 389(2) Cr.P.C read with Section 482 Cr.P.C has been moved on behalf of the appellant for suspension of sentence awarded to the appellant vide order dated 30th August, 2007. The appellant has been convicted by the trial court under Section 7 and 13(2) read with Section 13(1) (d) of Prevention of Corruption Act( in short, ? the Act?) and was sentenced to undergo RI for two and half years for offence under Section 7 and RI for 3 years for offence under Section 13(2) of the Act. Both the sentences to run concurrently.

(2.) It is argued by counsel for the appellant that initially one more person by the name of Ram Kumar was also made an accused in this case but he was discharged by the trial court. It was he who had accepted the bribe money. The appellant had not accepted the bribe money. While Ram Kumar has been discharged, the appellant has been wrongly convicted. The other argument of the counsel for the appellant was that the trial court has placed reliance on the audio tape without there being any identification of the voices by CFSL. The CFSL report only gave transcription of the audio tape. Neither the tape of sample voice were sent to CFSL nor the voices were identified. Placing reliance on the audio tapes was therefore illegal and the appellant could not have been convicted on the basis of such audio tapes. Counsel for the appellant also argued that there were several discrepancies in the testimony of witnesses and the conviction was bad and that it was a good case for suspension of sentence.

(3.) A perusal of record would show that it was appellant who had demanded the bribe of Rs.10,000/- from the complainant in order to settle the electricity case against the complainant which was pending with appellant. The complainant, who did not want to pay the bribe money, made a complaint to the anti corruption department and he also brought with him Rs.3000/- for raid since he could not arrange more amount with him. The appellant was to receive money at the house of the complainant. The raiding party took positions at the house of the complainant. The appellant came to the house of complainant along with Ram Kumar. It was appellant who demanded the bribe money from the complainant. However, when complainant wanted to hand over the currency notes to him, he told the complainant to hand over the same to Ram Kumar and asked Ram Kumar to take the money and keep the same. Ram Kumar took the money and kept the same in his pocket.