(1.) Aggrieved by the judgment of conviction dated 20th January, 2005 convicting the appellant finding him guilty under Sections 7 & 13 (2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as "PC Act, 1988" for brevity) and order on sentence dated 27th January, 2005 vide which the sentence was passed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year each for his conviction under Sections 7 & 13(1)(d) of the PC Act, 1988 and also to pay fine of Rs.5,000/- on each count and in case of default of payment of fine, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three months, the present appeal has been filed.
(2.) The facts in brief are that on the basis of the information received from the complainant Prithvi Singh to the effect that the appellant Anoop Kumar Joshi, while working as an employee of the erstwhile Delhi Electric Supply Undertaking (DESU), demanded bribe of Rs.1,000/- for rectifying the electricity bill in respect of the electricity connection installed at the house of the complainant, with further word of caution that in case of non- payment of the said amount of bribe, he would get the electricity supply disconnected at the house of the complainant, Inspector Kanwar Singh posted in Anti-Corruption Branch, along with the Government servant on duty, laid a trap for apprehending the accused red handed at the time of accepting the bribe. The investigating officer and the complainant took seven notes of the denomination of Rs.100/- each and explained it to the panch witness as well with regard to the manner in which the same were to be given to the accused. The said currency notes were treated with phenolphthalein powder and the complainant and panch witness were explained that if a person would touch those notes treated with phenolphthalein powder and the finger of such person is dipped in colourless solution of sodium carbonate, that solution would turn pink. A practical demonstration of the same was given by raiding officer and thereafter the notes were returned back to the complainant for the purpose of giving the same as bribe to the accused. The complainant, thereafter, gave the said seven currency notes to the accused who accepted the same with his left hand and then kept the notes in his right hand fist with the remarks that "Don't worry, your work is done" upon which the panch witness gave a pre-arranged signal to the members of the raiding party upon which Inspector Kanwar Singh rushed to the spot upon which he was informed that the accused had demanded a bribe of Rs.700/-. The accused is stated to have accepted the bribe money with his left hand and kept the same in his right hand fist. The said raiding officer then disclosed his identity to the accused and also offered his own search to the accused before conducting the search of the accused. Inspt.Kanwar Singh, the raiding officer then recovered the currency notes treated with phenolphthalein which upon comparison, tallied with the numbers already mentioned in pre-raid proceedings. Thereafter, solution of the sodium carbonate was prepared; washes of the hands of the accused were taken into the solution which turned pink. The solution was then poured into four different bottles and sealed. The bribe money was recovered and seized by the raiding officer; post raid report was prepared at the spot and the ruqqa was sent to anti-corruption branch. It emerges from the record that charges under Sections 7/13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 were framed against the accused to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
(3.) The appellant was held guilty by the learned Special Judge, Delhi and by an order dated 27th January, 2005, sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year each for his conviction under Sections 7 & 13(1)(d) of the of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and fine of Rs.5,000/- on each count and in case of default of payment of fine, to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for a period of three months.