NARENDRASINH CHHATRASINH PARMAR Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present conviction Appeal has been filed by the appellants original accused under Section 374 of the Cr. P.C., against the Judgment and order dated 27.10.2005 passed by the learned Special Judge (A.C.B.), Fast Track Court No.4, Ahmedabad (Rural), Navrangpura, in Special A.C.B. Case N.27 of 2003, whereby the appellantaccused No.1 was convicted for the offences punishable under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and sentenced to undergo 2 years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.2,000/, in default of payment of fine, further rigorous imprisonment of 2 months and for the offence punishable under Sections13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and sentence to undergo 3 years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.3,000/, in default of payment of fine, further rigorous imprisonment of 3 months, whereas appellantaccused No.2 was convicted for the offences punishable under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and sentenced to undergo 1 year rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.1,000/, in default of payment of fine, further rigorous imprisonment of 1 month.

(2.) ACCORDING to the prosecution case, appellantaccused No.1 Narendrasinh Chhatrasinh Parmar was serving as ASI at Aslali Police Station and appellantaccused No.2 was carrying a business of restaurant in Shreenath Shopping Centre at Isanpur and complainant was doing a business of free sale kerosene in godown at Shrenath Shopping Centre in the name and style of Dipika Traders. It is further the case of the complainant that to allow the complainant to sale free sale kerosene, a demand of Rs.10,000/made by appellantaccused No.1 and it was agreed that till 14.02.2003, the demand had to be fulfilled. It was also agreed that one Bhavansinh from Aslali Police Station would come to collect the amount from the complainant. As the complainant did not want to pay the amount of bribe, he approached ACB Office at Ahmedabad Rural and complaint lodged by Mr.Patel, as per the statement of the complainant. Then, Police Inspector, Mr.Patel, called two panchas from the Government office and facts of the complainant disclosed by the complainant in brief. Then, the said complaint was read over by panchas and made signatures. The complainant produced 6 currency notes in denomination of Rs.500/ and Rs.7000/obtained from the Government fund. The said trap amount was given to Police Constable Shri Girish Sisodiya, who applied phenolphthalein powder and sodium carbonate. Then, physical search of the complainant was made and the trap amount was inserted into the right pocket of the pant and and numbers of the trap amount were noted down in the panchnama. Thereafter, the complainant was instructed by Mr.Patel that not to touch the trap amount unless the demand made by appellantsaccused. Panch No.1 was advised to stay with the complainant and to hear the talk between the complainant and appellantsaccused while panch No.2 was advised to stay with the members of raiding party. Complainant was instructed to give the signal after the trap amount is accepted. Then, all went to the place of trap. Complainant and panch No.1 went to Dipika traders at Shreenath Shopping Centre at office of the complainant and other members of the raiding party followed them. Thereafter, first part of the panchnama was drawn and signatures of both the panchas were obtained. Then, after an hour, complainant and panch No.1 came to Mr.Patel, PI and told that none came to take the trap amount and trap amount was recovered from the possession of the complainant. He was instructed that if again any demand be made by appellantsaccused, he would inform to Mr.Patel, PI. Then, panchnama was drawn and signature of panchas and Mr.Patel were obtained. On 05.03.2014, the complainant went to the office of Mr.Patel at round about 16:00 and disclosed that Mr. Narendrasinh Chhatrasinh Parmaraccused No.1 came to his godown and made demand of bribe of Rs.10,000/ and he also made demand through mobile regarding the installment of free sale kerosene. Again, complaint was recoded and panchas were called and signature of the panchas were obtained and ingredient of phenolphthalein powder and sodium carbonate were introduced. The amount which was recovered from the complainant on 14.02.2003 was produced from the cupboard of the office and numbers of the said currency notes were tallied with the first part of the panchnama and was inserted into the pocket of the pant of the complainant. Again panchnama was drawn and again instructions were given to complainant and panchas which were given earlier. Thereafter, they went to godown of the complainant in Government vehicle. Panch No.1 and complainant both went to the complainant's office and members of raiding party and panch No.2 stayed just near to the godown of the complainant. Then, complainant talked with appellant No.1accused on mobile phone and appellantaccused No.1 informed him to give Rs.10,000/to Surendra Laxminarayan Sharmaaccused No.2, owner of Madhur Restaurant. Then, they went to the Madhur Restaurant. Then, accused No.2 conveyed the complainant to give Rs.10,000/ to him as he talked with accused No.1Parmar and complainant handed over Rs.10,000/from the right pocket of the pant and given to accused No.2Sharma, which was accepted by him with right hand, counted and inserted in right pocket of the pant. Then, signal was given and members of raiding party and panch No.2 rushed to the place of the trap. Then instruction from panch No.1 was obtained and search was carried out and trap amount of Rs.10,000/was recovered from the possession of accused No.2. Numbers of amount were compared with first part of the panchnama and presence of phenolphthalein powered was found from the fingers, palm and hand of accused No.2 as well as from the muddamal currency notes. Then, further investigation was carried out and telephone numbers and call details were also collected of accused persons and complainant. Then, statements of witnesses were recorded. As accused No.1 was public servant, sanction was obtained from the competent authority to prosecute against him. Thereafter, chargesheet was filed against the appellantsaccused for the offences punishable under Sections 7, 12, 13(1)(d)(i)(ii)(iii) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 by the investigating officer before the learned Special Judge (A.C.B.), Fast Track Court No.4, Ahmedabad (Rural), Navrangpura, which was numbered as Special A.C.B. Case N.27 of 2003.

(3.) ON the basis of above allegations, charge was framed against the appellantsaccused vide Exh.7 and readover and explained to the appellantsaccused for the offences punishable under Sections 7, 12, 13(1)(d)(i)(ii)(iii) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Then plea was recorded vide Exh.8 and 9, wherein, appellantsaccused pleaded not guilty to the charge and claimed to be tried. In support of the prosecution case, prosecution has examined following oral evidences :