SHYAM SUNDAR PRUSTY Vs. REPUBLIC OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant Shyam Sundar Prusty faced trial in the Court of learned Special Judge (C.B.I.) , Court No.I, Bhubaneswar in T.R. Case No. 15 of 2011 for offences punishable under section 7 & sections 13(2) read with 13(1) (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereafter '1988 Act') on the accusation that on 30.10.2010 at L.I.C. Office, Sector-19, Rourkela, he being a public servant functioning as Asst. Branch Manager, L.I.C. of India demanded and accepted Rs.1000/- (rupees one thousand only) from the complainant Bhubaneswar Dwibedy (P.W.8) for issuing fresh cheques against seven numbers of stale cheques issued by the L.I.C. to the complainant towards agent commission and that by corrupt and illegal means and by otherwise abusing his official position as such public servant, he obtained for himself pecuniary advantage of the aforesaid amount.

(2.) P.W.8 lodged the first information report before the Superintendent of Police, C.B.I., Bhubaneswar on 28.10.2010 stating therein that he was an agent of L.I.C. of India and his agent code number was 04607/589 and during the year 2009-10, he was issued with seven cheques towards commission of the L.I.C. of India. Although he collected the cheques from the L.I.C. office but he could not deposit the same in his account during the validity period of three months as he was busy in attending to his ailing father who was admitted in Apollo Hospital, Bhubaneswar and undergoing treatment. On 20.10.2010 he submitted an application to the Branch Manager, L.I.C. of India, Sector-19, Rourkela requesting him to issue fresh cheques in his favour in lieu of the aforesaid stale cheques. He enclosed the original cheques with his application. It is the further stated that on 28.10.2010 P.W.8 contacted the appellant who was the Asst. Branch Manager and requested him for issuing fresh cheques but the appellant told him that the cheques are ready but those would be handed over only if he pays bribe amount of Rs.1000/-. It is mentioned in the first information report that he did not want to pay the bribe for getting the cheques towards his commission but if the demanded amount is not paid, the appellant would not handover the cheques and harass him.

(3.) On receipt of the first information report, Mr. J.N. Rana, Superintendent of Police in charge, C.B.I. registered the case and P.W.10 Sachidananda Ratha, Inspector of police, C.B.I., Bhubaneswar was entrusted for laying the trap and to investigate the matter. P.W.10 requested D.S.P. D.K. Kabi over telephone to arrange government officials to act as witnesses during trap and he also instructed the informant to remain present at Unit Office, Rourkela on 30.10.2010 at 10.00 a.m. along with the bribe money of Rs.1000/-. On 30.10.2010 at 10.00 a.m., the trap team assembled at the C.B.I. Unit Office at Rourkela and in pursuance of requisition of D.S.P., C.B.I., Rourkela unit, independent witnesses namely Ashok Kumar Roy (P.W.3) and Kishore Kumar Pradhan (P.W.7) also reported for the purpose of witnessing the trap proceeding. The informant (P.W.8) reported at C.B.I. Unit Office, Rourkela at 10.00 a.m. on 30.10.2010 along with the amount of Rs.1000/-. He was introduced to the witnesses and the witnesses were shown a copy of the written complaint of P.W.8. The informant produced Rs.1000/- and the number of the G.C. note was noted down and solution of sodium carbonate and water was prepared in a clean glass tumbler by constable Jitray Singh which was colourless. Sri Singh treated the G.C. note with phenolphthalein powder and the witness Ashok Kumar Ray (P.W.3) was asked to handle the G.C. note by his hands and after he handled, he was asked to dip his fingers of both the hands in the solution after which the colour of the solution turned pink. The hand wash of P.W.3 was preserved in a clean glass bottle which was properly sealed, labeled and marked as 'D'. The tainted G.C. notes of Rs.1000/- was kept by constable Jitray Singh in the right side pant pocket of P.W.8 who was specifically instructed to handover the note to the appellant only on his demand. All the team members including both the independent witnesses and P.W.8 washed their hands with soap and water and it was ensured that none of the trap team members kept any money with them. It was decided that P.W.7 Kishore Kumar Pradhan would accompany P.W.8 to the L.I.C. office in the motor cycle of P.W.8 and rest of the team members including P.W.3 would follow them in a vehicle. A pre-trap memorandum (Ext.17) was prepared in the C.B.I. Unit Office, Rourkela which was read over to the witnesses after which they put their signatures on it. P.W.8 was instructed to pass prearrange signal by rubbing his hairs with both the hands after transaction was over and other trap team members were instructed to take their position. P.W.7 was instructed to remain with P.W.8 and to see transaction of bribe money as well as overhear the conversation between P.W.8 and the appellant.