V DHANDAPANI Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE Criminal Appeals are filed against the judgement dated 3.10.2002 passed in SC.No.16/1994 by the learned I Additional District Judge cum Chief Judicial Magistrate, Salem, convicting and sentencing the appellant/A1 for the offence under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act to undergo six months of Rigorous Imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/-, in default to undergo two months Rigorous Imprisonment and under Section 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/-, in default to undergo two months Rigorous Imprisonment and convicting and sentencing the Appellant/A2 for the offence under Sections 7, 7 read with 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 to undergo six months Rigorous Imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/-, in default to undergo two months Rigorous Imprisonment and under Section 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) (Two Counts) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 to undergo one year Rigorous Imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/-, in default to undergo two months Rigorous Imprisonment for each count and ordering the sentences to run concurrently.

(2.) THE case of the Prosecution is as follows:- a. THE complainant PW.3 Kumar is a weaver by profession, who had constructed a tiled house at Mecheri Town Panchayat by getting loan from the Cooperative Housing Society and gave an application to the Mecheri Town Panchayat Executive Officer (A1). He had met the Executive Officer (A1) 10 days prior to the date of trap and requested him to assess the tax for his newly constructed house, for which A1 demanded Rs.200/- as illegal gratification. When he came out of A1's room, A2, the Bill Collector also demanded a sum of Rs.50/- for assessing house tax. As PW.3 had no money, he expressed his inability to pay the sum to both of them individually. Again on 11.11.1992, PW.3 went to the Office of the Town Panchayat and met A1 and A2, but both of them again reiterated their demand and instructed him to bring the said sum as demanded by them apart from Rs.50/- for assessment fees. b. THE next day i.e. on 12.11.1992, PW.3 borrowed a sum of Rs.300/- from PW.6 Beemaraj his employer, but, however he was not willing to pay bribe to the accused persons and so, decided to give a complaint to the Vigilance Police. On the same day, he gave the complaint Ex.P3 to PW.12 L.Panneerselvam, the Inspector of Police, Vigilance and Anti Corruption. c. PW.12, the investigating officer on receipt of the said complaint registered a case in Cr.No.4/AC/92 for the offence under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption of Act and prepared FIR Ex.P22 and decided to conduct a trap as accepted by PW.3. PW.12 summoned the witnesses PW.4, K.V.Rajagopal who was working as an Assistant in the Education Department, Salem and one Kumar from the Office of the Housing Board. PW.12 received the decoy amount from PW.3 and demonstrated the phenolphthalein test to PW.3 and the witnesses summoned by him. On the same day, PW.3 was asked to give the said currency notes smeared with phenolphthalein powder and instructed him to give the amount to the accused persons, if the same is demanded by them and thereafter to come and give the prearranged signal by combing his hair with hands. PW.4 was instructed to accompany PW.3 and watch the conversation and further instructed to introduce him as a cloth merchant. d. In respect of the proceedings held at the Vigilance Office, PW.12 prepared the entrustment Mahazar Ex.P6 and thereafter, the raiding party, PW.12 and others including PW.3 and PW.4 left for Mecheri Town Panchayat Office and reached there at about 4.00 p.m. As per the instructions, PW.3 and PW.4 went inside the office of the accused. On seeing PW.3, A1 had asked whether he has come ready with the matter and when PW.3 acknowledged it, he asked to him wait outside till the arrival of A2. After some time, A2 arrived at and when PW.3 met him, he also asked him whether he has come ready with the matter. THEn A2 went inside the room of accused and PW.3 was asked to come inside and PW.3 went inside accompanied by PW.4 and the latter was introduced as a cloth merchant. At the instance of A1, PW.3 handed over Rs.300/- to A2 who kept the amount in his front left pocket. A2 asked him to wait till 7.00 p.m. to prepare the tax assessment. e. THEreafter, PW.3 and PW.4 came out and gave the signal as per the prearranged plan and PW.12 along with the raiding party entered inside and PW.2 identified A2 and also A1 to PW.12 as to have received bribe amount at the instance of A1. THEreafter, PW.12 conducted phenolphthalein test and when the hands of A2 was dipped into the solution, it turned into light pink colour. THEn PW.1 prepared a mahazar Ex.P12 and seized the shirt Mo.8. He also seized the decoy amount MO.1 (Series) and also seized Exs.P7 to P11 from the office of the Town Panchayat relating to this case. After complying with formalities and also after completion of investigation and getting sanction, PW.13 who took up the case for further investigation laid a charge sheet against the accused persons/A1 and A2 for the offences under Sections 7, 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) (Two Counts) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

(3.) THE court below, after hearing the arguments advanced on either side and looking into the materials available on record, found the accused/appellants guilty and awarded punishments as referred to above, which is challenged in these Criminal Appeals.