ARAKHITA NATH Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant having been convicted for commission of offences under Sections 13(1)(d) read with 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (for short 'the Act) and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay fine of Rs.500/ -, in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one month as well as under Section 7 of the Act and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months, has preferred this appeal.

(2.) THE appellant was working as a clerk in the Regional Transport Office (R.T.O.), Sundargarh during the period of occurrence dealing with issue of driving licenses. Prosecution case is that the informant -decoy P.W.2, a resident of Rourkela, went to the R.T.O. on 13.10.1988 to obtain a driving license. The appellant demanded bribe of Rs.150/ - from him saying that unless he paid the amount he would not be issued with the license. In view of applicants demand, P.W.2 borrowed Rs.50/ - from P.W.1 one of his friends who had come to the R.T.O., and paid to the appellant. When P.W.2 met the appellant on 25.10.1988 the appellant told that the license was ready and would be delivered to him if he paid the balance bribe amount of Rs.100/ -. On 26.10.1988 P.W.2 lodged written report Ext.10 before the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vigilance at Rourkela stating therein that on 27.10.1988 he was going to pay the balance bribe amount to the appellant. The First Information Report Ext.10 was forwarded to the Superintendent of Police, Vigilance, Sambalpur and P.W.9 Inspector of Vigilance was entrusted with the investigation. In course of investigation P.W.9 laid a trap stated to have been prepared with the assistance of P.W.3 Sub -Inspector of Police, Vigilance, Rourkela against the appellant on 27.10.1988 in presence of raiding party comprising of P.W.7 another Inspector of Vigilance and P.W.8 Additional Commercial Tax Officer, Rourkela. The appellant was caught red handed after accepting the tainted currency notes from P.W.2 towards illegal gratification as a motive for issuance of driving license. The tainted currency notes were seized. Hand wash of the appellant sent for chemical examination revealed presence of chemical powder with which the currency notes were smeared in course of preparation of the trap. On 31.12.1988 P.W.9 made over charge of investigation to P.W.4. On completion of investigation P.W.4 submitted charge -sheet for commission of offences under which the appellant stands convicted and accordingly charge was framed.

(3.) IN order to substantiate the charge the prosecution examined 9 witnesses, P.Ws. 1 to 9, and relied upon the documents marked Exts.1 to 11. P.Ws.1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 8 and 9 have already been introduced. P.Ws. 5 and 6 were working as Peons in the R.T.O., Sundargarh. It is pertinent to point out that the informant P.W.2 as well as P.Ws.1, 5 and 6 did not support the prosecution case. Only one defence witness, D.W.1, was examined on behalf of the appellant.