STATE Vs. J.LAXMAN MURTHY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE State assails the judgment and order dated 17.4.1996 passed by the Special Judge (Vigilance) Sambalpur wherein he acquitted the accused -Respondent of the offence under Sections 5(1) (d) of Prevention of Corruption Act read with Section 161 I.P.C.

(2.) BEREFT of all unnecessary details the prosecution case is that P.W.4 as proprietor of Trayombak Traders, a partnerships farm at Jeypore use to supply door and window frames and shutters to different Government offices including the office of Upper Kolab Development Division, Jeypore. In the month of October 1986 he supplied the aforementioned materials to the office of Upper Kolab Development Division, Bariniput, Jeypore. Accordingly, he prepared bills for payment but the accused -Respondent who was working as Divisional Accountant of the said office objected his bills time and again. On 27.9.1996 when he requested the accused -Respondent to pass the bills he demanded Rs.2000/ - as bribe and on further request reduced the amount to Rs.1000/ - P.W.4 paid him Rs.500/ - and assured to pay the rest of the amount shortly thereafter. The accused -Respondent insisted him to pay the balance amount of Rs.500/ - by 6,10,1986 or else he would not pass the bills. Under such circumstances he lodged a written report before the Dy. Superintendent of Police (Vigilance) Jeypore on 5.10.1986 on the aforesaid allegation. As the same revealed a cognizable case, a case was registered against the accused -Respondent for the aforesaid offences. On being directed by the Dy. Superintendent of Police (Vigilance) Jeypore, P.W.10, the Inspector of Police (vigilance) at Jeypore took up investigation and arranged a trap to be laid against the accused and requisitioned the services of the Addl. C.T.O. (P.W.7), Tahasildar, Jeypore and one Jr.clerk of Jeypore Block office (P.W.2). On 6.10.1986 the decoy (P.W.4) produced cash of Rs.500/ - in shape of 100 rupees G.C. notes, the B.D.O. and the Addl. C.T.O. noted the number of the currency notes in separate chits and after complying all formalities, P.W.10 instructed P.W.2 to accompany the decoy to Upper Kolab Irrigation Division office to overhear the conversation between the decoy and the accused -Respondent and to see the passing of the tainted G.C. notes to the hands of the latter and on receipt of the same to give signal to them. Accordingly P.Ws.2 and 4 together went to the office of the accused -Respondent and thereafter the raiding party went there. At 12.45 p.m. the raiding party getting signal from P.W.2 rushed inside the office of the accused. P.W.10 after disclosing his identity and the identity of others to the accused -Respondent challenged him receiving bribe from P.W.2 to which he denied. So the raiding party took his palm wash in sodium carbonate solution which changed its colour to pink and the tainted money was recovered from the drawer of the office table of the accused. On 4.9.88 P.W.9 took charge of the case from P.W.10, who after obtaining sanction from the Superintending Engineer Minor irrigation, Berhampur for prosecution against the accused submitted charge sheet. The plea of the accused -Respondent is complete denial of his complicity in the crime. It is his further plea that in his absence P.W.4 was found sitting on a bench near to his table and handling the office record and that he kept the tainted money in his table drawer without his knowledge. Moreover, he took the plea that he had already passed the bills of P.W.4 before the raid was conducted.

(3.) LEARNED Addl.Govt.Advocate submitted that when the carbonate solution turned pink after the accused -respondent dipped his hand inside the solution, the trial Court ought to have held that in fact the accused -Respondent received the tainted money as bribe.