SIDHARTHA KUMAR NATH Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant Sidhartha Kumar Nath faced trial in the Court of learned Special Judge, Vigilance, Bhubaneswar in T.R. Case No.86 of 1996 for offences punishable under section 7 and section 13(1)(d) punishable under section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereafter '1988 Act'). The learned Trial Court vide impugned judgment and order dated 16.09.2005 found the appellant guilty of the offences charged and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for one year on each count and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default, to undergo imprisonment for three months on each count and the sentences of imprisonment were directed to run concurrently.

(2.) P.W.1 Prafulla Kumar Ojha presented a written report before the Officer in charge, Vigilance police station, on the basis of which Vigilance P.S. Case No.37 of 1993 was registered under section 7 and section 13(1)(d) punishable under section 13(2) of the 1988 Act against the appellant. It is stated in the written report that P.W.1 was working as a contractor and he was given a contract to execute the work 'construction of Kandarabandha Bridge' in the year 1991 with contract value of Rs.36,000/-. The appellant was working as Junior Engineer in Balianta Block. P.W.1 had received an advance of Rs.22,000/- for the said work and on 23.07.1993 he received cash of Rs.5,000/- and for preparation of the bill of the aforesaid amount, he had given a sum of Rs.800/- towards bribe against his will to the appellant. It is further stated that after completion of the work, P.W.1 requested the appellant to prepare the final bill but the appellant demanded further sum of Rs.1,000/- from P.W.1 on 28.07.1993. After negotiation, P.W.1 agreed to pay a sum of Rs.500/- to the appellant on 30.07.1993 but he reported the matter before the Vigilance police station.

(3.) P.W.6 Janardan Mohanty was the Inspector of Vigilance, Cell, who on 29.07.1993 on receipt of the copy of the F.I.R. and on direction of S.P., Vigilance, took up investigation of the case. During course of investigation, he examined P.W.1 and recorded his statement. He placed the requisition on the same day to lay out a trap to detect the appellant accepting the bribe red handed. On 30.07.1993 preparation for trap was held in the office of D.S.P., Vigilance Cell, P.W.1 and other vigilance officials attended the preparation. He produced ten numbers of Rs.50/- currency notes whose numbers were noted down in the preparation report. The currency notes were smeared with phenolphthalein powder and kept in a fourfold paper and were handed over to P.W.1 with instruction to give the same to the appellant on demand. Witness Maheswar Mohanty (P.W.5) was instructed to stand as over hearing witness and to accompany P.W.1 and to overhear the conversation and to pass on his signal by brushing his hair by hand after witnessing the transaction. The hand wash of the constable and witnesses were preserved. A preparation report vide Ext.2 was prepared by P.W.6.