BUPENDRA KUMAR Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this appeal under section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the appellant seeks to challenge his conviction under section 161 of the Indian Penal Code and consequent sentence of rigorous imprisonment for six months with fine of Rs. 1,000/- and in default of payment of fine to suffer additional S.I. for three months vide judgment dated 15.11.1995 passed in Special Case No. 34/1991 by the learned Additional Sessions and Special Judge, (West Nimar) Mandleshwar.

(2.) According to the prosecution case, the appellant was posted Assistant Surgeon in village Segaon Primary Health Centre on 18.03.87. The complainant Uma Shankar was serving as Dresser at the same centre. Uma Shankar applied for advance of GPF money for which the appellant demanded bribe. Uma Shankar applied for advance of Rs. 5,000/- on which 25 percent i.e. an amount of Rs. 1,250/- was demanded by the appellant, but ultimately he agreed for Rs. 500 rupees. From the G.P.F. account of Uma Shankar, Rs. 4,000/- were sanctioned on which the appellant demanded 400 rupees. Uma Shankar was not willing to give Rs. 400/-, therefore, he made a complaint before the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Khargone supported by an affidvit. The complainant was able to manage only Rs. 350/- for the purpose of trap. Investigating Officer prepared a memorandum in presence of witnesses and written the numbers of the currency notes and arranged a trap of the appellant. SDO (P), SDM, complainant and other witnesses as per fixed schedule, reached to the appellant for giving bribe and trapping him red -handed. It is said that the appellant received Rs. 350/- from the complainant and kept the same in the table drawer. After acceptance of bribe money by the appellant, the complainant gave signal to the trap - party who reached on the spot and at the instance of the appellant recovered Rs. 350/- from the drawer of the table. The number of currency notes were tallied with the numbers mentioned in the initial memorandum and thereafter, the same were seized. Appellant was arrested and released on bail by the Investigating Officer. On completion of investigation, appellant was charge - sheeted for the offences under section 161 of the Indian Penal Code and section 5(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

(3.) Appellant refuted the charges and submitted that the complainant was a mischievous employee having inimical terms with him because of which, he lodged a false complaint and concocted a false case. Learned trial Court while acquitting the appellant from the charge under section 5(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act; 1947, convicted and sentenced him as indicated herein above.