STATE Vs. HARBANS LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal by the State against the judgment of the Special Judge acquiting the respondent Harbans Lal Gupta, of the charge of having accepted illegal grantification of Rs 50/ from the complainant P. W. 1, Sant Ram, on 31st March, 1965, an offence which, if proved, would have been punishable under Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 (hereniafter called the Act).

(2.) The respondent Gupta, was the Sanitary and Food Inspector posted at Arki while P. W. 1 Sant Ram has a shop at Dhundhan, a few miles from Arki. On 23rd March, 1965, Gupta came to the shop of Sant Ram for inspection. Though Tuesday was a closed day for Sant Ram's shop, Gupta ordered him to open it and brought by way of sample 750 grammes of Shakkar, i e. unrefired sugar, sealed it in three packets and gave one to Sant Ram and took away the other two. It is alleged that Gupta., however, told Sant Ram not to be afraid and asked him to come and see him at his office at Arki. Sant Ram however had no intuition to do so. When Sant Ram met him accidentally on the 28th March, 1965 at the Arki bus-stand, Gupta again told him that he should not be afraid but asked him to arrange to supply him four or five kilos of ghee asking it as a. bribe by implication inasmuch as in the circumstances in which the two parties were placed, the accused did not intend to pay the price of it to Sant Ram. Sant Ram did not like the corrupt suggestion made by the accused :.nd on the 30th of March went to Simla to the Office of the Deputy Superintendent of Police. Anti Corruption Unit and made a written report there that if the accused were to demand cash as bribe, he would pay to the extent of Rs. 60.00 to him as bribe. Six ten rupee notes were shown by Sant Ram to the police and their numbers were noted in the report made by Sant Ram This report is Exhibit P. W. 1/A. The police asked Sant Ram to bring two independent witnesses from his village in the 31st March, 1985 to Arki police station Accordingly, Sant Ram went there with P. W. 7 Sukh Dev of Dhundhan and P. W 8 Brij Lal of Lalhyana. The police also called two independent witnesses of Arki, viz., P. W. 2 Balmukand and P W. 3 Mehar Chand to witness the trap Sant Ram had, is the meanwhile, collected some applications for licence from his neighbours and visted the accused to get those applicatioiis sanctioned During his meeting with the accused at the latter's office at Arki, Sant Ram is said to have been told by the accused that since no ghee had been arranged some cash may be paid inasmuch as something out of it would have to be sent to Chandigarh also for obtaining favourable report on the sample seized from Sant Ram's shop Accordingly, Sant Ram paid Rs. 50.00 to the accused. Thereafter, Deputy Superintendent of Police Shri S. M, Sagar (P. W, 22) and Inspector Bhag Singh (P. W. 23) accompanied by P. W. 2 Balmukand and P. W. 3 Mehar Chand went to the office-cum-residence of the accused and recovered the marked currency notes of Rs. 50.00 from the almirah in his office.

(3.) The defence was that on the 28th March, 1965 when Sant Ram not the accused at Arki, the latter gave him Rs. 50.00 to buy four or five kilos of ghee. for the accused. However, on the 31st March Sant Ram came to the accused and said that he could not procure the ghee wanted by the accused and returned the sum of Rs. 50.00 which Sant Ram had borrowed from the accused. It is these Rs. 50.00 which were seized by the police from the almirah in the office of the accused. The money was thus not received as illegal gratification, but only as the repayment of the money which had been paid as advance for the price of ghee by the accused to Sant. Ram.