BABULAL Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been filed by the appellant against the judgment dated 19.05.2000 delivered by Ist Addl. Sessions Judge and Special Judge, Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Chhatarpur in Special Case No. 6/98whereby the appellant has been convicted for alleged offence punishable under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") and sentenced to R.I. for two years and fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo S.I. for six months.

(2.) IN short, the facts of the case are that appellant was posted as Accountant in Primary Health Centre (hereinafter referred to as "PHC"), Rajnagar, District-Chhatarpur. At that time, Dr. Ashok Tiwari (PW.1) (for short "complainant") was working as Assistant Civil Surgeon in Civil Dispensary, Chandranagar in the year 1996. Dispensary of complainant was under the control of PHC, Rajnagar. As arrears of pay near about Rs.10,000/- were to be paid to complainant in respect of which the bills were to be prepared by the Accountant, appellant asked 25% of the arrears, about Rs.2,000/-, in bribe. Complainant was asked to come with the money on 26.10.96 to which complainant asked that why this amount was being demanded, appellant said that he had incurred the expenditure in the treasury for getting the bills passed by the treasury so he is demanding Rs.2,000/- to which complainant said that some concession may be given. Then appellant told complainant to give Rs.1,000/- in cash and remaining amount in form of contingency bill for some family planning camp, etc. So, it was asked that Rs.1,000/- be given in bribe by the complainant on 26.10.96. As complainant did not want to give the bribe so he approached office of SPE, Lokayukta, Sagar on 25.10.96 and submitted complaint Ex.P/1. For verification, complainant was asked to record the conversation on tape recorder, the conversation was got recorded on tape recorder on the same day, and complainant handed over the tape recorder along with the cassette in the office of SPE, Lokayukta, Sagar for which panchnama Ex.P/3 was prepared by A.K.Dubey (PW.5) INspector, Lokayukta Police, Sagar. After being satisfied, trap was arranged by P.K. Guru, INcharge, Deputy Supdt. of Police, Lokayukta on the basis of complaint Ex.P/1 given by complainant and A.K.Dubey (PW.5) was ordered to arrange for a trap.

(3.) ON charges being framed, appellant pleaded false implication. His defence, as per his statement under Section 313 of Cr.P.C., was that complainant who was a Doctor wanted that appellant should help him in the wrong deeds and on being refused, he was annoyed with the appellant, so he falsely implicated the appellant in this case.