JAY MANGAL SINGH Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) APPELLANT has filed this appeal against the judgment dated 01.01.1999 passed by Special Judge (Prevention of Corruption Act), Satna in Special Case No.2/92 convicting the appellant under section 7 and section 13(1)(d) read with section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and sentencing him to rigorous imprisonment for one year with fine of Rs.1000/- and rigorous imprisonment for one year with fine of Rs.1000/- on each count, respectively. Sentences of imprisonment have been directed to run concurrently.

(2.) IN short, the facts of the case are that appellant Jay Mangal Singh was working as a lineman in the M.P. Electricity Board. At the relevant time i.e. on 17.5.1990 he was posted at headquarter village Jamuna. Village Turki where complainant (PW-1) resided came within the jurisdiction of headquarter Jamuna. On 17.5.1990, complainant (PW-1) submitted a written report Ex.P/1 in the office of Special Police Establishment, Rewa stating that he had taken connection of electricity on his Well situated in his agricultural land No.497/1 in village Turki. On 14.5.1990, appellant removed one grip from the transformer whereby supply to his electric connection was stopped. When he requested the appellant to restore the power supply to his connection, he demanded Rs.100/- by way of illegal gratification. Since he did not wish to give bribe, he approached to Special Police Lokayukta. The said report was marked by Superintendent of Police Mr.Handa to INspector R.P.Tiwari (PW-10) instructing him to arrange for a trap. INspector Tiwari requisitioned Mr.P.D.Navrekar, District Employment Officer in the office of Lokayukta Rewa and introduced him to the complainant. Complainant tendered two currency notes of Rs.50/- each to INspector. The numbers of the said notes were recorded in a memorandum. Demonstration about the trap proceeding was conducted in the Lokayukta Office before the witnesses. Phenolphthalein powder was applied by constable Gajraj Singh to the aforesaid currency notes of Rs.50/-. The said tainted currency notes were put in the pocket of shirt of the complainant and he was instructed to deliver the said notes to appellant on being demanded by way of illegal gratification. A preliminary memorandum Ex.P/2 was prepared and Dehati Nalishi Ex.P/16 was recorded.

(3.) AFTER further requisite investigation, and after obtaining sanction from the prosecution Ex.P/13, charge sheet was filed in the Court of Special Judge.