SHAM SUNDER Vs. C.B.I.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present appeal has been filed under Section 374/382 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the judgment dated 19.01.2001 and order on sentence dated 27.01.2001 passed by the learned Special Judge, CBI, Delhi. By virtue of the said judgment, appellant was convicted under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act and sentenced to two years of rigorous imprisonment together with a fine of Rs. 10,000/ -. In default of the payment of fine, appellant was directed to undergo imprisonment for a further period of six months. The appellant was also convicted under Section 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and sentenced to two years of rigorous imprisonment together with a fine of Rs. 10,000/ -. In default of the payment of fine, appellant was directed to undergo imprisonment for a further period of six months. Both the sentences were to run concurrently.

(2.) BRIEF facts of the case as noticed by the learned Special Judge are that telephone No. 5741398 was installed in the joint names of Sh. Raghuvir Singh and Sh. Anoop Singh at 10/18, East Patel Nagar, New Delhi. After the death of Sh. Raghuvir Singh, his widow, Smt. Prakash Kaur, submitted an application for transfer of the said telephone in her name and shifting of telephone connection to 34/22, East Patel Nagar, New Delhi. This application was filed in the office of MTNL, Rajouri Garden Exchange in May, 1994. Smt. Prakash Kaur had deputed and authorized Sh. Anil Prakash Nijhawan to pursue the said application with Rajouri Garden Exchange authorities. Appellant, who was working in the Department as a Lower Division Clerk was dealing with the aforesaid application of Smt. Prakash Kaur. The complainant, Anil Prakash Nijhawan, was tracking the progress of the application. On 22.08.1994, during lunch hours, the appellant (outside his office) told the complainant that the matter had been processed and formalities had been completed, but the complainant would have to pay him an amount of Rs. 2500/ - for getting the order for shifting of the telephone number and the change of name. It was also alleged that the appellant had told the complainant that out of the said sum of Rs. 2500/ -, the complainant should pay Rs. 500/ -, in advance, on 23.08.1994 and the remaining amount he would have to pay at the time of handing over of the OB for shifting of telephone.

(3.) IN support of its case, the prosecution examined eight witnesses. Statement of the appellant was recorded under Section 313 of Cr.P.C., however no witness was examined in defence. In his statement recorded under Section 313, Cr.P.C. the appellant admitted that an application had been made by the widow of late Sh. Raghuvir Singh for transfer of telephone connection, however, he stated to have refused to entertain the complainant in the absence of a letter of authority from the widow of late Sh. Raghuvir Singh. As per the appellant, it is because of this that the complainant was nursing a grudge against him. He stated that the sanction for his prosecution was granted by Sh. H.P. Wadhwa, the then Deputy General Manager (Administration), N.T.R., New Delhi. However, the same was invalid as it was accorded without any application of mind. The appellant also deposed that he had been falsely implicated with the help of CBI in order to create an atmosphere of terror in the minds of MTNL officers so that in future he may be accommodated by them in relation to his liaison work. He denied having taken or accepting any illegal gratification. He further deposed that on the day of trap, 4/5 persons had entered in his room, physically apprehended him and thereafter forcibly put the tainted Government Currency Notes into his pocket.