BISHAMBHAR DAYAL SRIVASTAVA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a criminal appeal against the judgment and order dated 13th July, 1989 passed by the then Special Judge/Additional Sessions Judge, Kanpur Nagar in Special Sessions Trial No. 2/85 State of U.P. v. Bishambhar Dayal Srivastava convicting the appellant under Section 161 I.P.C. and Section 512 of the Prevention of Corruption Act and sentencing him respectively to one years Rigorous Imprisonment and one years Rigorous Imprisonment coupled with a fine of Rs. 500/- thereunder.

(2.) The prosecution case briefly Stated is that on 17.9.1983 the appellant-accused Bishambhar Dayal Srivastva was working as Pharmacist in the Employees Slate Insurance Dispensary, Pandu Nagar, Kanpur. Shiv Mohan P.W. 2 was an employee in the Elgin Mill NO.1 Kanpur. On 19.3.1983 he was admitted to the Employees State Insurance Dispensary, Pandu Nagar, Kanpur in connection with his medical treatment. He had been hospitalised till 15.6.1983 on which date he was however discharged. He head to spend Rs. 609-70 paise in connection with his treatment. He moved an application, Ex. Ka-4 before the Superintendent, Employees State Insurance Dispensary, Pandu Nagar, Kanpur and enclosed therewith discharge certificate, vouchers etc. for reimbursement of the aforesaid sum of money. The superintendent sent that application to the Head Clerk B.N. Srivastava, who in his turn marked it 10 the appellant-accused for necessary action. Shiv Mohan P.W. 2 met several times the appellant-accused in order to get the aforesaid sum of money reimbursed. But the appellant-accused avoided doing anything on his (Shiv Mohans) application and ultimately demanded 10% of the aforesaid sum 01 Rs. 609-70 Paise as illegal gratification from him for doing his work. Consequently Shiv Mohan P.W. 2 made a complaint to the Superintendent, Employees State Insurance Dispensary, Pandu Nagar, Kanpur but to no effect. However, he (Shiv Mohan) P.W. 2 again met the appellant-accused, who demanded Rs. 50/- for doing his work. Shiv Mohan returned after assuring him that he would give him Rs. 50/-.

(3.) On 17.9.1983 he made an application Ex. Ka-5 to the Superintendent, Vigilance Department against the appellant-accused, whereupon the Superintendent, Vigilance interrogated Shiv Mohan in connection therewith. Shiv Mohan had a fifty-rupee-note with him for the purpose of giving it to the appellant-accused and therefore he gave that note to the Superintendent, Vigilance, who made his initial therefore and directed the Dy. S.P. of Police (Vigilance) Kanpur, who was also available in the office, to take necessary action and therefore Shiv Mohan met him also there. The Dy. S.P. of Police (Vigilance) made certain queries from him. He also put his initial on the said note. He sent for two public witnesses in the office through a police constable. He made certain queries from Shiv Mohan before the witnesses and got the said note treated with phenolphthalein powder by the police constable besides observing certain other formalities in connection therewith. He satisfied himself in all respects and thereafter returned the said note to Shiv Mohan with the direction that he would give that very note (Material Ex. 1) to the appellant accused on his demand. The Dy. S.P. of Police (Vigilance) Sri Tejveer Singh P.W. 1 prepared a Fard Ex. Ka-2 to the aforesaid effect.