DURGA PRASAD PATNAIK Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant had been convicted under section 5(2) read with section 5(I) (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act (referred to as the Act) and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for eighteen months. He has further been convicted under section 161 I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months with a direction that the substantive sentences shall run concurrently.

(2.) The prosecution case may be stated in brief. The appellant was serving as the Revenue Inspector of Girisola in Ganjam district. The informant, G. Jagayya (P.W. 3) and his mother had been in possession of Gochar lands in the same village and had raised paddy crops thereon for which encroachment cases had been initiated against them. The appellant had threatened P.W. 3 to attach the standing paddy crops and further held out hope that if a sum of Rs. 200/- was paid to him he would not make the attachment. In order to satisfy the appellants greed, P.W. 3 borrowed a sum of Rs. 100/- from D. Ramaswamy (P.W. 8) and paid the same as bribe to the appellant on 12.12.1976 in the presence of his cousin G. Tarini Rao (P.W. II). The appellant accepted the sum of Rs. 100/- but asked P.W. 3 to pay a further sum of Rs. 100/- to him on 14.12.1976 failing which he threatened to attach the paddy crops. On such illegal demand P. W. 3 felt outraged and reported the incident to the Superintendent of Police (Vigilance), Berhampur at 8.30 P.M. on 13.12.1976 and on his instruction lodged the F.I.R. (Ext. I) at the Vigilance Police Station, Berhampur. The Vigilance Officers arranged a trap and took into confidence two gazetted officers of the State Government, Shri Biswanath Maharana, Assistant Engineer, P.H. Division, Berhampur (P.W. 4) and Shri Gourishankar Das, District Agriculture Officer, Ganjam (P.W. 10) to remain present at the time of the trap. Having made all arrangements, the Vigilance party along with the witnesses proceeded to Girisola during night and took vantage positions around the house of the appellant. On 14.12.1976 at 6 a.m. the decoy witness (P. W. 3) paid a sum of Rs. 100/- to the appellant as bribe according to the latters demand and on signal made by P.W. 11 who had concealed himself wear by, the Vigilance Police Officers along with independent official witnesses (P. Ws. 4 and 10) rushed to the place and seized Rs. 100/- in currency notes (M.Os. Ito 1/9) from the possession of the appellant by, seizure list (Ext. 14). After close of the investigation, order of sanction (Ext. 15) under section 6 of the Act was obtained from the District Magistrate, Ganjam to prosecute the appellant and charge sheet was submitted for offences under section 5(2) read with section 5(1)(d) of the Act and under section 161 I.P.C.

(3.) The plea of the appellant was that he did not receive a sum of Rs. 100/-on 12.12.1976 nor the sum of Rs. 100/- at 6 a.m. on 14.12.1976 from P.W. 3 at the time of the alleged trap,. On the other hand, there were two encroachment cases against G. Tumbanath (P.W. 12), father of P.W. 1 I in which a sum of Rs. 256.42 paise was to be paid as Government dues. Paddy crops on the encroached land had been seized and auction was to be finally held on 15.12.1976. On 14.12.1976 at about 6 a.m., P.W. 11 paid a sum of Rs. 100/- to him in currency notes each of the denomination of Rs. 10/- towards the arrear dues of his father (P.W. 12). While the appellant was holding the currency notes between his fingers saying that he would receive the arrear dues in part, the raiding party along with witnesses arrived and seized the currency notes and foisted a false case against him.