PARAMESWARAN PILAI R Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE accused in CC 4 of 2002 on the file of the Enquiry Commissioner and Special Judge, Thiruvananthapuram, is the appellant. He was working as a Civil Surgeon in the Primary Health Centre, Pulluvila, in January and February, 2001. PW 5 Suganthy, wife of PW 4 was admitted in the Primary Health Centre on 27/01/2001 with viral fever. According to the prosecution, at the time of admission, the appellant asked whether they had brought the fees. Responding to the query Rs.50/- was paid by PW 4. PW 5 was admitted in the Primary Health Centre; but there was no improvement. The other patients in the hospital stated that unless the doctor was paid well, they won't get proper treatment. On 30/01/2001, PW 4 met the appellant in his consulting room near the Primary Health Centre and paid Rs.50/-. Thereafter, medicine was changed. Since the temperature remained steady PW 4 again met the appellant on 01/02/2001. According to the prosecution, the appellant demanded Rs. 250/- as bribe. Being got aggrieved, PW 4 made a complaint to the Superintendent of Police, Vigilance & Anti Corruption Bureau, Thiruvananthapuram. On advice, PW 4 went to PW 6, the Deputy Superintendent of Police on 03/02/2001 at 10 a.m. and gave Ext. P8 First Information Statement. PW 6 recorded Ext. P8 and registered a case as Crime No. VC. 4/2001 against the appellant for offence under S.7 and S.13(2) read with S.13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act (for short, "PC" Act). Ext. P10 is the First Information Report. PW 6 made arrangements for trapping the appellant. He procured two independent witnesses of whom one was examined as PW 1, an Assistant Director of Industries and Commerce. The independent witnesses were appraised of the nature of the complaint and phenolphthalein test was demonstrated in the presence of PW 1, PW 4 and other independent witnesses. PW 4 had brought a 100 Rupee note which was marked as MO 1. PW 6 got the same, smeared phenolphthalein powder and entrusted back to PW 4 to keep in safe custody with instruction to give to the appellant in the event of repetition of demand. A mahazar was prepared regarding the demonstration of phenolphthalein test and entrusting of MO 1 to PW 4. PW 6 took PW 1, 4 and other independent witnesses along with the raid party and proceeded to the Primary Health Centre. They took positions and sent PW 4 to the appellant with direction to give signal in the event of acceptance of bribe by the appellant. The appellant was on leave. PW 4 came to understand that the appellant would be available only on 5th, the following Monday. The matter was informed to PW 6. Accordingly, PW 6 returned with instruction to PW 4 to report on 5th. On 05/02/2001, PW 4 reported before PW 6. Phenolphthalein powder was again smeared over MO 1 and handed over to PW 4 again with instruction to pay it to the appellant only on repetition of demand. Ext. P2 mahazar was prepared. PW 6 along with the officials and the independent witnesses including PW 4 proceeded to the Primary Health Centre. PW 6 and the party took positions at different places near the Health Centre. PW 4 went to the appellant. According to PW 4, the appellant repeated demand. MO 1 was handed over to the appellant. The appellant accepted the same and put it in the drawer of the table. PW 4 came out and conveyed signal, responding to which PW 6 along with PW 4 and other officials rushed to the appellant. PW 6 disclosed his identity and introduced PWs 1, 4 and other independent witnesses to the appellant. PW 6 subjected himself to phenolphthalein test. Thereafter the hands of the appellant were subjected to separate phenolphthalein test which turned positive. When asked, the appellant stated that PW 4 had deliberately thrust the currency note into the drawer of the table. The drawer of the table was got opened. MO 1 was found lying inside the drawer. It was ceased and subjected to phenolphthalein test which also turned positive. A ball pen and a cover found inside the drawer were also subjected to phenolphthalein test which turned positive. MOs 7 and 8 are the cover and ball pen. The appellant was arrested and Ext.P3 recovery mahazar was prepared. Thereafter, the attendance register and the case sheet which were marked as Exts. P5 and P6 respectively, were seized after preparing Ext. P4 recovery mahazar. The investigation was taken over by PW 6. After completing the investigation, a final report accusing the appellant for the above offence was filed before the Trial Court.

(2.) THE learned Special Judge took cognizance and issued process responding to which the appellant entered appearance. He was furnished with a copy of the final report and connected documents. Either side was heard. On finding that there are materials to send the appellant for trial, a charge for the said offence was framed. When read over and explained, the appellant pleaded not guilty. Hence he was sent for trial.

(3.) I have heard Sri. Pirappancode V.S. Sudheer and the learned Public Prosecutor Sri. B. Vinod and perused the evidence on record.