I MOHAN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE accused, having faced the trial for offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act, failed to succeed, resulting conviction, which is impugned in this appeal.

(2.) ONE Nachimuthu was the Registered Contractor in P.W.D., where the accused, by name Mohan, was working as Sub Divisional Officer/Assistant Executive Engineer. After completion of the work regarding certain contract, the said Nachimuthu presented the bill for endorsement from the appellant, in order to realise the amount, as per the contract. The accused, on 7.2.1994, at about 6.30 p.m., demanded illegal gratification of Rs.3,000/= from the said Nachimuthu, thereby giving grievance to Nachimuthu. Therefore, the said Nachimuthu approached the respondent, who arranged trap, to book the accused/appellant, for receiving illegal gratification, which proved successful. Thus following the procedure, a final report came to be filed before the I Additional Sessions Judge-cum-chief Judicial Magistrate/Special Judge, Erode, seeking appropriate punishment under Sections 7 and 13(2) r/w.13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act.

(3.) THE facts necessary to dispose of the case: (i) THE accused/appellant was working as Sub Divisional Officer/Assistant Executive Engineer, Public Works Department, Dharapuram Sub-division of Erode Division, as public servant. Thiru Nachimuttu, being a registered contractor in P.W.D., undertook some work and after completion, he presented the bill for counter-signature of the accused/appellant, prior to 7.2.1994. (ii) THE said Nachimuthu had borrowed the amounts from P.W.2-Thiru Karthikeyan, who requested him to repay the amount. Nachimuthu, awaiting the bill amount from P.W.D., promised P.W.2 to repay the amount after realisation of the bill amount and in pursuance of the same, P.W.2, accompanied by Nachimuthu, went to the house of the accused on 7.2.1994, in order to get the approval of the bill. (iii) On seeing Nachimuthu, the accused demanded the amount and therefore, aggrieved by the same, with the help of P.W.2, Nachimuthu prepared Ex.P.2 complaint and subscribing his signature-Ex.P.3, he went to the Vigilance Department and met P.W.11 at about 11.00 a.m., then giving Ex.P.2. On that basis, a case came to be registered, for which Ex.P.18-printed FIR was prepared, submitted to the Court concerned. (iv) THEreafter, P.W.11 arranged a trap proceeding, with the help of P.W.9, who was working as Deputy Superintendent of Police at that time. At the request of P.W.9, Nachimuthu produced Rs.3,000/= in denomination of Rs.100/= i.e. M.O.1. P.Ws.9 and 11, securing official witnesses viz. P.W.3 and another, explained the effect of Phenolphthalein and its reaction to Sodium Carbonate solution. In M.O.1 currency notes, coating Phenolphthalein and demonstrating how it should be given to the accused on demand, the amount was given to Nachimuthu. THE procedure adopted was incorporated in the mahazar also. (v) THEreafter, as directed by P.W.9, Nachimuthu and P.W.2 went to the house of the accused at about 6.45 p.m., on 8.2.1994. When the accused demanded the amount, Nachimuthu tendered Rs.3,000/= to the accused, which was accepted by him. (vi) THEreafter, Nachimuthu, coming out of the house of the accused, gave signal to the Deputy Superintendent of Police (Vigilance), as directed, and watching the same, P.W.9 and others went to the house of the accused. Though P.Ws.3 and 9 and the persons accompanied them have seen the accused, sitting inside the house, the accused went to the bathroom and the call was answered by his wife. After the accused came out from the bathroom, P.W.9 requested about the money received by him from Nachimuthu. At the same time, preparing Sodium Carbonate solution, P.W.9 requested the accused to immerse his hands in the solution, which turned into pink colour, thereby indicating, he should have received the tainted currency, which was entrusted to Nachimuthu, by P.W.9. Thus concluding, when P.W.9 requested the whereabouts of the amount, he informed the availability of the amount in the bathroom, which was recovered under a mahazar. For recovery and for the other procedure adopted, documents were prepared, then accused was arrested. (vii) THEreafter, following the other procedures and examining the other witnesses viz. P.Ws.5 to 8 regarding the tender process and the procedure adopted for encashing the bill, the Investigating Officer also obtained sanction through P.W.1, for prosecuting the accused, since he was working as a public servant. (viii) THE materials, so collected, revealed the fact, that in order to perform an official duty, the accused had received illegal gratification i.e. other than the legal remuneration and thus taking the view, a final report came to be filed, leading to trial, ending in conviction, which is impugned in this appeal.