NARENDRA GUPTA Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Being aggrieved by the judgment dated 30.11.2019 passed by Special Judge (Prevention of Corruption Act), Dhar whereby the appellant has been convicted for the offence/s punishable u/s. 7, 13(1)(d) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and sentenced to undergo 5-5 years RI and to pay fine of Rs.2000-2000/- with default stipulation, the present appeal has been filed.

(2.) As per prosecution story, the complainant - Nayansingh Thakur aged 55 years, resident of Rama Dham, Tehsil Manawar made a written complaint dated 24.11.2016 in the office of S.P.E., Lokayukta, Indore (Ex. P/10) contending that all the Govt. employees were given the benefit of arrears of pay from the year 2011 after completing 24 years of service. He was entitled to get Rs.32,027/-, but the same was not paid to him, therefore, he met the present appellant on 24.11.2016 for release of the aforesaid amount, but he demanded Rs.1,500/- as illegal gratification and directed him to arrange for the said amount by 25.11.2016 , but he does not want to give the bribe and wanted him to be caught red-handed. The SPE Lokayukta instructed one Rajkumar Saraf, Inspector to verify the contents of the complaint and proceed accordingly. Along with the written complaint, the complainant also handed over the memory card. After hearing the conversation recorded in the memory card and verifying the demand, the Investigating Officer kept the memory card in the sealed cover vide Ex. P/11 and registered 'Dehati Nalis' u/s. 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act (Ex. P/34). He arranged the 'Panch' witnesses and directed the complainant to arrange for currency notes of Rs.1,500/-. After completing the necessary process, the team including the complainant reached Dharampuri near about at 11.45 am. As per the pre-decided programme, the complainant telephoned the appellant who called him near "Gayatri Mandir Shakti Peeth", Dharampuri. After coming of the appellant, the complainant met him and handed over the tainted money which he kept the same in his pocket. The complainant indicated the members of the trap team who immediately rushed to the spot. The tainted money was recovered from the pocket of the appellant. After completing the remaining part of the investigation, the FIR was registered against the present applicant and one Shrikant Keshanya who was posted at the relevant point of time as Assistant Grade-III in the Office of Block Development Education Officer, Dharampuri. After obtaining necessary permission/sanction from the State Government, challan was filed against both of them. After appreciating the evidence that came on record, learned Special Judge has acquitted the co-accused Shrikant Keshanya, but convicted and sentenced the present appellant, as aforesaid.

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the ppellant has been falsely implicated in the case and the appellant has a good prima facie case in his favour and hopes for success in this appeal. Learned Special Judge has failed to appreciate the evidence came on record and has wrongly convicted him. The electronic evidence has been discarded in the evidence. Based on the same set of evidence, the co-accused has been acquitted. The appellant was not competent to release the amount of arrears in favour of the complainant, hence there was no reason for him to demand illegal gratification. The complainant has also turned hostile, therefore, the conviction was not warranted at all. The appellant is in jail since the date of judgment i.e. 30.11.2019 and has completed more than 8 months out of 5 years' sentence and there is no likelihood of early disposal of this appeal in near future. He, therefore, prays that the jail sentence awarded to the appellant be suspended and he be released on bail.