STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. JAYWANT RAMCHANDRA KAMBLE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a State appeal that questions the acquittal of the charge of corruption of respondent Jaywant Kamble, who was engaged as a Police Constable and was working as such at Dafalsur Out-Post. Prosecution against him for offences under section 161 of the Indian Penal Code and section 5(1)(d) read with section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act has failed before the Special Judge, Sangli.

(2.) Now, the facts upon which the prosecution relied have been satisfactorily proved and can be merely stated so as to indicate the eventual point that arises for decision in the present case.

(3.) In the trap that was laid by Anti-Corruption P.S.I. Surve (P.W. 12) on November 1, 1973 upon a complaint lodged by Kondiba (P.W. 2) on October 31, 1973 as per Ex. 9, in the presence of Panch Vithal (P.W. 3) Rs. 40/-, which were tainted with anthracene powder, were recovered from the respondent Police Constable. As far as the earlier steps leading to the trap are concerned, there is clinching evidence coming forth from P.S.I. Surve that Kondiba approached him and lodged the complaint as per Ex. 9, thereafter he proceeded to have the authorisation from the Judicial Magistrate; First Class, Sangli as per Ex. 33 and laid the trap after drawing up the pretrap panchanama in the presence of the panchas, one of whom has been examined during the trial . That panchanama is at Ex. 11. It is further seen that the actual passing of the monies was witnessed by panch Vithal and Kondiba gave the pre-arranged signal and P.S.I. surve eventually apprehended the accused and effected the seizures of the tainted notes. He drew up the post-trap panchanama as per Ex. 12. It has been shown that P.S.I. Toro (P.W. 11) was in charge of Jath Police Station, under which fall the Dafalpur Out-post. On October 18, 1973, Rama, son of Hari, (P.W. 9), approached this Police Station and complained that his cycle had been forcibly taken away by some persons from Village Khalati. Upon this, the Dafalpur Outpost was directed to call these persons. The accused, who was holding the said Outpost, was directed by Head Constable Patil (P.W. 10) in that regard and when the accused went to Village Khalati, one Appa, who appears to be little idiotic, abused the accused, who, according to Appa, was not in the police dress and was trying to harass the villagers. Eventually, the accused took the person as well as the cycle to the Police Station. P.S.I. Toro was informed by both P.W. 9 Rama Mote, who was the original complainant, and the persons who were produced that matter was compromised. That matter thus came to an end. At that time, the present accused informed P.S.I. Toro that one Appa had abused and insulted him but had not come. P.W. 2 Kondiba, who is the complainant in the present case, told P.S.I. Toro that Appa was half mad and he must be executed. If necessary, Appa would be produced on the next day. P.S.I. Toro has started that he directed the accused to produce Appa on the next day. So also, he directed Kondiba (P.W. 2) to produce him with a view to warn Appa. Though Appa was thereafter not produced, P.S.I. Toros evidence is that he did not take any steps in that regard. It is then the case of Kondiba, supported by the evidence of P.W. 4 Maruti and corroborated by his complainant (Ex. 9) on the eventual passing of the monies, that he met the accused and entreated him to patch up the matter, upon which the accused expressed his willingness by telling him that if Rs. 50/- were paid, he would not take any further action; otherwise he would see that Appa was dealt with and arrested. The evidence of Kondiba is clear that upon this he paid Rs. 10/- to the accused and promised to pay the remaining amount of Rs. 40/- and thereafter he contrasted P.S.I. Surve and lodged the complaint as per Ex. 9. Eventually in the company of panch Vithal, the remaining Rs. 40/- were paid on the day of the trap, that is, on November 1, 1973, and the same were attached during the investigation by P.S.I. Surve.