STATE OF M.P. Vs. GOVIND DAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE judgment of absolvitur passed by learned Special Judge in special case No. 8/83 acquitting the Respondent from the charges punishable under Section 5(1) (d) and 5 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act (in short 'the Act') and also under Section 161, IPC on 12th May, 1993, has been made pivot in this appeal by State of Madhya Pradesh by filing this appeal under Section 378(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

(2.) IN brief, the case of prosecution is that complainant -Ram Ram Tiwari is a practising Advocate in Rahli, Distt. Sagar. His Bhabhi (elder brother's wife) is having some agricultural land in village Patna Kakri. Complainant -Ram Ram Tiwari was inclined to purchase one acre land of his Bhabhi for a consideration of Rs. 65,000. This deal was settled. At that time, the Respondent was serving on the post of Patwari of village Patna Kakri. It is said that Complainant -Ram Ram Tiwari asked Respondent to prepare Aks (map) of the land which he purchased after getting it measured. For this, Respondent made a demand of Rs. 2,000/ - from complainant. A sum of Rs. 500/ - was paid by complainant -Ram Ram Tiwari and balance amount of Rs. 1,500/ - was settled to be given on the date of incident viz 15/4/1986. Since complainant -Ram Ram Tiwari was not inclined to give illegal gratification to the Respondent and wanted to get him caught red handed eventually, on 15/4/1986 complainant submitted a complaint addressed to the Collector, Sagar, on the basis of which a trap was arranged. After registering the case and doing the needful, 15 currency notes of Rs. 100/ - each coated by phenolphthalein powder, were handed over to the complainant and the same were kept in the pocket of his trouser and he was pacified that he should not touch the currency notes before handing over the same to the Respondent. Thereafter, complainant called Respondent at his residence and there he handed over the currency notes covered by phenolphthalein powder to him and thereafter a signal was given to the trap party who rushed and caught hold the Respondent. Thereafter, his hands were washed and the hand wash was turned to pink. After obtaining the sanction to prosecute the Respondent under Section 161, IPC and also under Sections 5 (1) (d) and 5 (2) of the Act, a charge sheet was submitted before the Special Court. The Special Court, on going through the charge sheet, framed charges punishable under Section 5(1).(d) read with Section 5(2) of the Act punishable and also framed a charge under Section 161, IPC. Needless to emphasis, Respondent abjured his guilt and pleaded complete innocence.

(3.) IN order to bring home the charges, prosecution examined as many as 13 witnesses and placed Ex.P/1 to P/17, the documents on record. The defence of Respondent is of false implication anil he further defence he set forth is that his brother Harinarayan has the land business and is a property dealer. By taking his brother's service, the deal between complaint and his Bhabhi was settled and complainant -Ram Ram Tiwari agreed to give a sum of Rs. 2,0007 - to the brother of complainant -Harinaraian towards commission. The brother of complainant -Ram Ram Tiwari namely Hari Ram Tiwari gave a sum of Rs. 5007 - to Harinaraian (brother of Respondent) and balance amount of Rs. 1,500/ - was agreed to be paid later. Thereafter, Hari Naraian started living at Sagar and he directed Respondent who is his brother to receive his balance amount of Rs. l,500/ - from/complainant -Ram Ram Tiwari and complainant was also told to pay the balance amount of Rs. 1,500/ - to Respondent. The further defence that indeed, complainant became dishonest and when the repeated demand of payment of Rs. 1,500/ - was made from complainant -Ram Ram Tiwari, he became annoyed and started keeping enmity with him and hence in order to implicate the Respondent falsely, a false complaint was lodged and Respondent was called by complainant -Ram Ram Tiwari at his residence and where he gave Rs. 1,500/ - to him and also told that this amount is the balance amount of commission of his brother Harinarayan, since he (Harinarayan) settled the deal of the land which was purchased by the complainant -Ram Ram Tiwari. In this manner the Respondent kept the amount Rs. 1 ,500/ - and thereafter the trap party arrived and caught hold him.