PRAVINKUMAR AMRATLAL GAJJAR Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal is preferred by the appellant-convict (hereinafter referred to as 'the appellant') under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, assailing the judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Special Judge, Ahmedabad City, dated 27th September, 1989, whereby the appellant has been held guilty for the offenc, punishable under Section 161 of the Indian Penal Code and also under Section 5(1)(d) read with Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), on various grounds mentioned in paragraph no.8 of the memo of the appeal. The learned Special Judge after recording the evidence of the prosecution and defence, and hearing the arguments, convicted the appellant for the aforesaid offences and sentenced the appellant to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/- and in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months qua the offence punishable under Section 161 of the Indian Penal Code and imposed punishment under Section 5(2) of the Act to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and a fine of Rs.1000/- and in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months. The substantive sentence is ordered to run concurrently by the learned Special Judge.

(2.) Shri A.D. Shah, learned counsel appearing for the appellant, has taken this Court through the grounds of challenge and has read over the oral evidence of all the three important witnesses namely the complainant-Ayubbhai Chhotubhai Shaikh-PW-1, Ex.9; Narendrakumar Maganlal Soni-Panch no.1, PW-2, Ex.16; and Shri Kanchanlal Ratilal Jadav-Police Inspector and Investigating Officer-PW-4, Ex.24; along with the evidence of three defence witnesses examined i.e. DW-1 Sumanbhai Ratilal Joshi Ex.34, DW-2 Navinbhai Mohanlal Patel Ex.44 and DW-3 Nafisaben A. Karkhanawala Ex.45.

(3.) It is necessary to state the facts of the prosecution case in brief. It is the case of the prosecution that the appellant was serving as Assistant Engineer, Water Department, in the Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation at Ahmedabad. One Munshibhai Chandbhai Lokhandwala, residing near Char Toda Kabrastan, Behind Ramkumar Mills, Ahmedabad, had applied for water connection in Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation on 17th May, 1986 with the help of complainant, who is son-in-law of the said Munshibhai. The requisite amount of Rs.243-47 ps. to be paid was paid to the Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation. The complainant thereafter had often inquired about the progress but the said application was not sanctioned under some pretext. On 29th December, 1986, at about 03-00 p.m. the complainant met the appellant being a responsible officer in his cabin and requested him for giving him water connection. During his repeated visits, he was asked that his work cannot be done without making the payment. The complainant, therefore, inquired as to what he was required to do and appellant told him that the complainant shall have to pay the amount of Rs.100/- to the appellant and Rs.200/- as per the rules. Thus, on payment of the aforesaid total amount of Rs.300/-, he will send the employee of the Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation for connection. The complainant then told him that at present he had no money and the appellant, therefore, told him to come in the evening between 03-00 p.m. and 04-00 p.m. with an amount of Rs.300/- within a day or two, and his work will be done. As the complainant had no intention to pay the amount demanded illegally, he approached the ACB Police Inspector and filed a complaint on 31st December, 1986 at about 12-30 p.m. The ACB Police Inspector Shri Jadav arranged for two panchas and by completing the formalities required for arrangement of trap, the complainant along with the panchas and raiding party personnel went to the office of the appellant. The complainant found that the appellant had proceeded on half day leave and, therefore, he was not available. So the complainant and raiding party personnel returned to the jeep car parked near Khamasa Gate, where Police Inspector Shri Jadav was waiting for the signal. The currency note of Rs.100/- stained with anthracene powder was taken back from the complainant on a piece of paper and the same was wrapped by the Police Inspector and thereafter, necessary formalities for closure of the trap were carried out. The complainant was informed that he should see that if the appellant again demands for bribe, the said Police Inspector is contacted. On 05th January, 1987, the complainant again approached the ACB Police Inspector Shri Jadav informing him that he had again contacted the appellant on 03rd January, 1987, and when the appellant has again made a demand of amount of bribe, and he is informed by the appellant to see him in the evening between 03-00 p.m. and 04-00 p.m. on Monday, then ACB Police Inspector Shri Jadav recorded the further complaint of the complainant below the original complaint dated 31st December, 1986. Thereafter, he called for panchas other than those who were called on 31st December, 1986 and these panchas were explained about experiment and effect of anthracene powder on the currency note, earlier which was kept in the pocket of the complainant and the same was to be handed over, on demand, to the appellant. The panch no.1 was informed to remain in company of the complainant and was asked to see and hear whatever happens between the complainant and the appellant. After reaching the Water Department, the complainant along with the panch no.1 first went to the table of one Navinbhai-DW through whom the file pertaining to the water connection of the complainant was taken and as per the rules, they paid the amount of Rs.200/- to Nafisaben DW-3, Account Clerk of the Water Department and she issued a receipt and retained the file with her. The complainant and panch no.1 then went to the said Navinbhai with the receipt of Rs.200/-. The said Navinbhai prescribed for certain articles to be purchased for water connection on the reverse side of the said receipt and, thereafter, the complainant and panch no.1 went to the cabin of the appellant. There was only one spare chair in the said cabin of the appellant which the complainant occupied and the panch no.1 stood there. The complainant asked about the water connection and the appellant inquired about the panch no.1. The complainant introduced the panch no.1 as his friend. The complainant requested the panch no.1 to go out. The panch no.1 went out of the cabin and stood near the half flap door of the cabin of the appellant. It is alleged that he was able to hear the talk between the appellant and the complainant, and demand of money by the appellant and saw the payment made by the complainant and acceptance of the same by the appellant. The complainant then came out of the cabin and gave a signal as instructed and on receiving the signal, the members of the raiding party including the panch no.2 asked the appellant not to move from his position. The ACB Police Inspector Shri Jadav came there and gave his introduction and thereafter, necessary formalities as to search of muddamal currency note of Rs.100/- was carried out and in turn, the experiment of ultraviolet lamp and seizure was completed. The appellant was issued a seizure memo for the articles seized from the appellant. The ACB Police Inspector thereafter recorded the statements of witnesses including Navinbhai, Nafisaben and members of the raiding party; and on obtaining necessary sanction from the Commissioner of Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation to prosecute the appellant, filed a charge-sheet on 13th June, 1988.