STATE Vs. PREMPAL & ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been filed against the judgment dated 17.12.2009 wherein the Court of Special Judge (PC Act) had acquitted the three respondents. The aforenoted three respondents had been charged for the offence under Section 7 and Section 13(1) (d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as "the P.C.Act").

(2.) The version of the prosecution is that respondent no.1 Prem Pal on the asking of respondent nos.2 and 3 (Ved Prakash and Suresh Kumar Kaushik) had accepted the bribe money of Rs.900/- from the complainant Shyam Sunder Kohli. This was pursuant to a raid having been organized by the appellant on the complaint of the complainant. The allegation was that on 11.5.2001 at 2.45 p.m. Prem Pal (who was working as a safai karamchari in the NDMC) came to the restaurant of the complainant at Connaught Place wherein he had collected the bribe amount of Rs.900/- from the complainant and this was on the asking and at the behest of respondent no.2 and 3 i.e. Ved Prakash and Suresh Kumar Kaushik (working as sanitary inspectors in the NDMC). The accused Prem Pal was apprehended at the spot. His handwash which had been obtained was sent to FSL, Malviya Nagar who vide its report dated 20.6.2001 (Ex.PW-4/B) had opined that the handwash of the accused Prem Pal gave a positive result of handling phenolphthalein coated GC notes. This report was positive and in favour of the prosecution.

(3.) The prosecution in support of its case had examined 13 witnesses of whom the star witness was PW-3 (B.P.Dutta) who was the Panch Witness. The complainant Shyam Sunder Kohli had died by then; he could not come into the witness box and thus could not prove the complaint. The TLO Inspector M.A.Salam was examined as PW-5. PW-4 was also a member of the raiding party. The other witnesses examined by the prosecution were largely formal; relating to the sanctions which had been accorded qua respondent nos.1, 2 and 3 by their employers.