D VENKATASAN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The above appeal is directed against the Judgment of conviction and sentence rendered by the IX Additional Special Judge, Madras in C.C. No. 7 of 1990 on 26-3-1991, whereunder, the appellant was found guilty for the offence under Section 7(3 Courts) and 13 (1)(d)(1) and (2) r/w 13 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months each with a fine of Rs. 500/- in default of payment of which to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one month under each count' under Section 7, and to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year with a fine of Rs. 500/- in default of payment of which to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for a period of one month under S. 13(1)(d)(1) and (2) read with 13 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) The appellant was working as Sub Inspector of Police, Traffic Investigation Wing, attached to Anna Square Police Station on the relevant day of occurrence in this case.One Mr. Ayub of Madras working as Accounts Assistant in Climax Agency, Nungambakkam, along with one Vijayaragavan a co-employee happened to travel in an auto-rickshaw from the State Bank Overseas Branch at the first like (sic) beach road to their office at Nangamkkam at about 1 p.m. on 22-7-1989, driven by P.W. 1 Agastih. The auto-rickshaw was bearing the registration mark M.M.R 599. When they were approaching the Periyar Statue in Anna Salai after crossing Manroe statue, a Maruthi car came in the opposite direction and had a sudden turn towards Gimkhana club and to avoid the head on collision P.W. 1 applied the brake of the auto rickshaw, which became capsized upside down, with the result, both the passengers, P.W. 8 and Mr. Vijayaraghavan fell down and P.W. 8 sustained the fracture of the bone in his right hand. This was followed by both the injured being taken to the Government Hospital. After the treatment, P.W. 1 and the driver of the Maruthi car were taken to the Anna Square. Police Station, where, it was stated that the accused/appellant herein, had demanded a sum of Rs. 500/- as bribe, to help him in the case, for which P.W. 1 was not agreeable as he was very poor but however, he had agreed for payment of Rs. 400/- and to bring the money P.W. 1 was sent out and the auto-rickshaw and its connected documents were retained in the Police Station itself. When P.W. 1 tried tocontact P.W. 2 kabali over phone he was not available and therefore, he approached P.W. 5 Thiagarajan at his house and got a sum of Rs. 150/-. Subsequently, P.Ws. 1, 2 and 5 had been to the Anna Square Police Station and took P.W. 1 on bail by giving a sum of Rs. 150/- to the accused by way of bribe. To return the R. C. Book the accused demanded a sum of Rs. 150/-. Then P.W. 1 approached P.W. 7 Perulal Patna, a Pawn Broker, at about 8 p.m. on that day and got a sum of Rs. 350/- by pledging his ring and the pledge receipt was marked as Ex. P.1. On the next day, i.e. on 23-7-1989, P.W. 1 paid another sum of Rs. 150/- to the accused and consequently, the accused had instructed him to take the auto-rickshaw for brake test with the necessary form. Accordingly, it was taken to the Regional Transport Office, Cheput and subjected to brake test but however, he was instructed to bring Rs. 100/- the balance at 8 p.m. on the next day after the brake test was over. On 24-7-1989 P.W. 3 Mr. Veerapandi, the Brake Inspector, inspected the vehicle brought by P.W. 1 and issued Ex. P.5 certificate. P.W. 1 thought of reporting the whole matter to the Vigilance and Anti Corruption Police and consequently took P.W. 5 Mr. Thiagarajan to the Office of the Deputy Superintendent of Vigilance and Anti Corruption Mr. Nallama Naidu, examined as P.W. 12 and narrated the whole thing happened so far. On his instructions, he gave a written complaint to P.W. 13. P.W. 13 on the receipt of the said complaint, varified it with the complainant later registered it in Crime No. 10 of 1989 and took up the case for investigation. The written complaint given by P.W. 1 is Ex. P.2. As instructed, P.W. 1 went to the Police Station in the evening. In the meanwhile P.W. 13 had requisitioned P.W. 4 Mr. Thanikachalam and another Srinivasan and introduced P.W. 1 to both and appraised them of the complaint received and registered already. He also verified the bribe money brought by P.W. 1, 20 rupee denomination -currencies 5 in number, the numbers of which was taken down in a white paper. Then the phenolpthalein test to be conducted was demonstrated to the witnesses by P.W. 13 by bringing two glass tumblers containing sodium carbonate solutions. P.W. 4 and another Srinivasan were asked to dip their fingers in the solution. There was no change of colour. After smearing phenolpthalein powder on the currency note, P.W. 4 and the other witness were asked to count them and then they were asked to dip their fingers in the sodium carbonate solution. The solution turned pink in colour. A mahazar Ex. P.4 was prepared for all the incidents happened so far and the same was attested by witnesses. P.W. 1 and P.W. 4 were sent to Anna Square Police Station in an auto rickshaw with a direction of bribe. P.W. 13 along with the party had proceeded to the Anna Square police station but however stopped near the Surangani restaurant in the beach road. P.W. 13 and witness Srinivasan took position in the grass lawn opposite the main entrance of the Anna Square police station about 9 p.m. on that day, on seeing the signal given by P.W. l as instructed, P.W. 13 and other witnesses entered the police station, where P.W. 1 pointed out the accused as the person who demanded the money and received the bribe. After having instructed P.W. 1 to wait in the vigilance and Anti Corruption Office by putting a table and chair in the entrance of Anna Square police station. P.W. 13 prepared a sodium carbonate solution and made the accused dip his right hand fingers and the solution turned pink in colour. The contents were duly packed and sealed in a glass tumbler attested by the witnesses, which is M.O. 2 The money found in the left hand of the accused was recovered and it was verified and found tallying with Ex. P. 4 and then P.W. 13 made the accused to dip his left hand fingers in the sodium carbonate solution prepared in another glass tumbler. The solution turned pink in colour. That solution was packed in a glass tumbler and labelled and attested by witness. That is M.0.3. Then P.W. 13 entered inside the Police Station and recovered the copy of the accident register involved in the instant case and other documents Ex. P. 6, 14, 15 and 16. Then he prepared Ex. P. 8 mahazar as to what took place in the Police Station and obtained the signatures of the witnesses. He also prepared a rough sketch showing the topography of the scene of crime. He arrested the accused at about 10.30 p.m. on that day and searched the house of the accused in Ice House, where noincriminating material was found. Ex. P. 9 is the search list. He then sent requisition Ex. P. 10 to the Court to send M.O. 2 and M.O. 3 for chemical examination. P.W. 9 Mr. Malayappan dispatched M.O. 2. and M.O. 3 for chemical examination under the original of Ex. P. 11 and the Chemical Examiner's report Ex. P. 12 was received in Court. P.W. 6 Kalyanaraman was examined to show that it was under him P.W. 2 Kabali was working on the day of occurrence and that on that day P.W. 2 came and attended the Office. P.W. 10 working as Superintendent in the Office of the Commissioner of Police, Madras, has spoken to the factum of the receipt of the report sent by the Director of Vigilance and Anti Corruption with the entire case file and the case records and the statements recorded from the witnesses and other documents and that he placed everything before the Commissioner of Police Mr. Rajasekaran Nair, for perusal and after having considered the same, a sanction order under Ex. P. 13 was accorded by the authority. P.W. 11 working as Inspector of Police at Anna Square Traffic Investigation Wing during the day of occurrence claims that during the relevant date the accused was working as Sub Inspector of Police under him. After the investigation was over, P.W. 13 submitted the final report to the Court against the accused for the alleged offences above referred.

(3.) When the accused/appellant was examined under Section 313 (1)(b) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, on the basis of the incriminating circumstances appearing against him in evidence, he has denied his complicity in the crime but however he did not choose to examine any witnesses on his behalf. Two documents Ex. D1 and Ex. D. 2 respectively dated 21-7-1989 and 9-12-1989 xerox copies of the proceedings of the Commissioner and the Assistant Commissioner were marked on behalf of the accused. But however, it is found that the said documents have no relevancy for the facts of this case, nor any attempt was made to show as to how the said documents acquired any nexus in this case.