XAVIER SELVARAJ Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been brought forth by the appellant, who was charged, tried and found guilty under Sections 7, 13(2) r/w 13(1)(e) of Prevention of Corruption Act and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/-, in default, two months simple imprisonment and no separate punishment under Section 7 of Prevention of Corruption Act was imposed.

(2.) The short facts that would be suffice for the disposal of this appeal can be stated as follows: P.W.2, Balakrishnan and his brother purchased 5 cents of house sites in S.No.501/6 at Vembalur village and an application was made to the Tahsildar, Agastheeswaram requesting for the transfer of patta to their names. On 27.6.1992 they received Ex.P.4, Post card, from the Village Administrative Officer/the accused herein summoning them to come with original documents on 27.6.1992. When the applicant approached the office on 6.7.1992, met the Village Administrative Officer and showed the post card, the Village Administrative Officer instructed him to come with original documents after two weeks. On 23.7.1992 when the applicant went over there with original documents, the accused/appellant demanded Rs.100/- as bribe for the issue of patta after perusing the records. The applicant expressed his inability to meet the said demand, then the accused informed him that he would issue patta if Rs.50/- paid and asked him to come with the amount before Monday evening. The applicant was not willing to do so and he informed the matter to the vigilance authorities by producing the original documents and post card. On receipt of the complaint from him, a case was registered by the Inspector of Police, Vigilance and Anticorruption, Nagercoil in Crime No.7 of 1992 under Section 7 of Prevention of Corruption Act on 27.7.92. The matter was taken up for investigation and a trap was arranged. The complainant, first, proceeded to the office of the accused with the police officials, but the accused went on leave. On 28.7.1992, they proceeded to the residence of the accused. When the accused reiterated his earlier demand, the complainant paid a sum of Rs.50/-, which was sprayed with Phenolphthalein powder. The appellant received the said amount and kept the same on his left side shirt pocket. The appellant asked the original documents and the post card and noted down the number in the post card. He returned the original documents to the complainant and kept the post card in his left side shirt pocket. He informed the complainant to meet him at his office on Saturday. When the complainant came out of the residence of the accused, as arranged earlier, he gave signal immediately to the investigating officers. They proceeded to the residence of the accused and a test was followed. The Investigating Officer asked the accused to produce the amount received from the complainant. The left side shirt pocket of the accused was also subjected to the test after giving another shirt. The test was also proved positive. Under such circumstances, further investigation was completed and a charge sheet was also laid.

(3.) In order to prove its case, the prosecution examined P.W.1 and P.W.12 and marked Exs.P.1 to P.31, apart from marked M.Os.1 to 5. The accused was questioned under Section 313 of Cr.P.c. as to the incriminating circumstances in the prosecution witnesses, which are flatly denied by the accused as false. No defence witnesses were examined. After considering the rival submissions and careful scrutiny of the available materials, the trial court found him guilty and convicted him as stated above.