DWARKAPRASAD RAMNATH GUPTA Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) APPELLANT Dwarka Prasad s/o Ramnath Gupta, aged about 40 years, a Sanitary-cum-Food Inspector, then posted at Ashoknagar, District Guna, has come up in this appeal against his conviction by Shri T. N. H. Pancholi, Special Judge, guna, in Sp. Case No. 1 of 1981, under the Judgment dated 11-1-1982, under section 161 of Indian Penal Code and Section 5 (d) read with Section 5 (2) of the Prevention of corruption Act and the sentences, respectively thereunder, of rigorous imprisonments' for one year and 11/2 years, along with fine of Rs. 250/-, in default further rigourous imprisonment for two months. The jail sentences are to run concurrently_

(2.) FOLLOWING facts are not in dispute :-That on the date of the alleged offence dated 29-11-1978 and prior thereto, appellant Dwarka Prasad was posted as the food-cum-Sanitary Inspector at ashoknagar, District Guna. Hari Shankar Gupta (P. W. 3) is the son of Motilal Gupta (P. W. 5) and they own and run a restaurant-cum-sweet meat (Halwai) shop at ashoknagar. On 31-8-1978, a sample of "jalebi" was obtained from their sweet meat shop by the appellant under and in accordance with the provisions of the Food adulteration Act, one part of which was also sent for analysis to the Public Analyst. Subsequent thereto, on 29-11-1978 Hari Shankar (P. W. 3) paid at his shop a sum of Rs. 750 - in currency notes to the appellant. In course of the trap which had been laid for the appellant, the currency notes, which had earlier been initialled by Sub-Divisional officer, Ashoknagar Shri Soumitra Bose (P. W. 7), were seized from possession of the appellant under the seizure memo Ex. P. 2. After obtaining the sanction of the competent authority, the appellant was prosecuted in respect of the offences, for which he has been convicted. It was also not disputed by Hari Shankar (P. W. 3) that he had earlier obtained a sum of Rs. 250/- as loan from one Prakash Narain Gupta (D. W. 4)related to the appellant, at Jhansi, and the latter had addressed the letter, Ex. D. 5 to him (Hari Shankar) for the re-payment of loan.

(3.) THE Prosecution case was that in order to drop the proceedings against Hari shankar (P. W. 3) and/or his father Motilal Gupta (P. W. 5) regarding their prosecution in respect of the alleged offence under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, the appellant was pressing Hari Shankar for the bribe amount of Rs. 500/-, which was ultimately settled at Rs. 250/ -. However, Hari Shankar (PW. 3) who wanted to teach a lesson to the appellant, complained against him to the Sub-Divisional Officer, ashoknagar, Soumitra Bose (P. W. 7) and also submitted the written complaints dated 29-11-1978 (Ex. P. 11 and P. 1) regarding graft before him, whereafter a trap was laid by the Sub-Divisional Officer in association with Sub-Divisional Officer police Manipat singh (P. W. 8 ). 'in pursuance of the trap, complainnat Hari Shankar (P. W. 3) paid the sum of Rs. 250/-in marked currency notes as bribe to the appellant, which amount, as is not disputed, was recovered from his possession, immediately thereafter, and seized under the seizure memo Ex. P. 2. Some other articles in possession of the appellant were also seized under seizure memos Ex. P. 3 and P. 4 at the time of his arrest under memo ex. P. 5. After obtaining the sanction for prosecution vide Ex. P. 11-A dated 18-2-1981, the appellant was prosecuted in respect of the offences, for which he has been convicted.