AZAM ALI Vs. REX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE case against the applicant, a clerk constable at police station Pilkhwa, who has been convicted under Section 161, Penal Code, by the Courts below, was as follows.

(2.) A stray camel was caught by one Jaipal and was tied up at his door. A Sub -Inspector of police of Pilkhwa police station went to the village on 23rd January 1947 and arrested Jaipal on the charge of stealing the camel. Though the villagers told him that it was not a case of theft, he did not release Jaipal on bail and took him to the police station where he was locked up. Ami Lal and Shiva Nandan offered security next morning and the Sub -Inspector demanded a bribe of Rs. 150. They borrowed Rs. 60 from one Man Singh and paid the money to the Sub -Inspector and promised to pay the balance on the nest day. On this promise, Jai Pal was released on bail. Jaipal, Shiva Nandan and Ami Lal then saw the Deputy Superintendent, Anti Corruption Department, and the Additional District Magistrate who set a trap to catch the Sub -Inspector in the act of receiving the balance. The three men accompanied by a First Class Magistrate went to Pilkhwa on 26th January 1947. At the gate of the police station, a constable asked Jai Pal if he had brought the money. On Jaipal's answering in the affirmative, he took him to the quarters of the Sub -Inspector. The Sub -Inspector said that he would not accept the money at night and that Jai Pal should go to him next morning. Next morning Jaipal, Shiva Nandan, Ami Lal and Man Singh went to the Sub -Inspector's quarters with unsigned notes, the numbers of which were noted down by the Magistrate. It seems that the Sub -Inspector's refusal to accept the money at night was out of fear that he might not detect markings on the notes. So the Magistrate took back the signed notes that he had given to Jai Pal on the provisions day and gave him unsigned notes. When Jai Pal, etc., met the Sub -Inspector and offered him the money, he directed them to pay it to the applicant, Azam Ali. Jai Pal etc., went into the office at the police station and deliberately offered Rs. 90, keeping back Rs. 10 in order to suggest that there was no trap. The applicant took Rs. 90 and said that he would go and find out from the Sub -Inspector whether to accept Rs. 90. As he came out of the office, Jai Pal signalled and the Magistrate accompanied by an Inspector of the Anti -Corruption Department entered the police station premises, stopped the applicant and asked him if he had any money. The applicant point -blank denied. The Magistrate threatened to search his person and awaited the arrival of the Deputy Superintendent of Police. The applicant availed himself of the opportunity and at once ran into the Muslim Kitchen and threw the notes into fire. He was chased by the Inspector and other persons. By the time the Inspector reached the door of the kitchen the applicant had come out and tried to stop him from going in. The Inspector forced entry and salvaged the half -burnt notes from the fire. The numbers of those notes tallied with the numbers previously noted by the Magistrate. The Sub -Inspector escaped into Pakistan and could not be prosecuted. The applicant was prosecuted and on the strength of the evidence of the persons mentioned above has been convicted.

(3.) THE Courts below have found the above case proved from the testimony of the witnesses.