GURDEV SINGH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is a sequal to the impugned judgment/ order dated 6th July, 1977, passed by the learned Special Judge, Delhi, whereby he convicted the appellant for having demanded and accepted an illegal gratification of Rs. 500.00 (Rs. 100.00 receivedincashandRs.400.00 by amoney orderlateron)from one Mohan Singh for getting his pension case finalised.

(2.) The facts and evidence which formed the basis of conviction of the appellant are that the appellant, a clerk in the Ministry of Home Affairs, New Delhi, was contacted by one Mohan Singh, a retired member of the Indian National Army, for getting his pension case finalised, who in turn, demanded an illegal gratification of Rs. 500.00 . Mohan Singh gave a sum of Rs. 100.00 which he was carrying with him alongwith a number of papers relating to the case of the grant of pension, to the appellant. On return to his village, Mohan Singh arrahged for funds and remitted the balance of Rs. 400.00 by money order which was duly received by Gurdev Singh on 23rd December, 1974. Mohan Singh received a letter dated 27th December, 1974 from Gurdev Singh, demanding a further payment of Rs. 200.00 . Mohan Singh felt exasperated and came to Delhi with Mangal Singh (Public Witness 3) and both. of them went to the office of Shri Shah Nawaz Khan, the then Minister of State for Agriculture, and apprised him of the whole matter. They also showed the postal receipt, the money order receipt and the letter written by the appellant.

(3.) The Additional Private Secretary to the Minister, under the directions of the Minister Shri Shah Nawaz Khan, made an enquiry. In the enquiry, the appellant, admitted having written the letter. Ex. Public Witness Public Witness I/C, and also admitted that he had demanded Rs. 500.00 out of which Rs. 100.00 had been paid to the appellant in cash and the balance had been remitted by a money order which was duly received by the appellant vide money order receipt Ex. Public Witness Public Witness I/B, which admittedly bore the signature of the appellant. It was suggested to the appellant that it would be in his own interest to return the money accepted from Mohan Singh. Thereafter, a case was registered and investigation was conducted by the CBI. The prosecution examined various witnesses all of whom subscribed to the prosecution story. In defence, the appellant examined one Surjit Singh.