LAWS(ORI)-2019-3-64

KISHORE KUMAR MISHRA Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

Decided On March 19, 2019
Kishore Kumar Mishra Appellant
V/S
STATE OF ORISSA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Judgment of conviction and sentence dated 14.05.2009 passed by the learned Special Judge (Vigilance), Bhubaneswar in T.R. No.62 of 2000 convicting the Appellant under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 ("P.C. Act" for short) and sentencing him to suffer R.I. for six months and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- (one thousand) with default stipulation, has obliged the convict Appellant to file this Appeal.

(2.) The date of occurrence was 16.09.1998. One Pankaj Kumar Chhualsingh (P.W.7) presented a written complaint before the S.P. (Vigilance), Bhubaneswar alleging demand of illegal gratification of Rs.500/- (five hundred) by the Appellant. The Appellant at that time was working as a Junior Clerk in the Office of the A.D.M., Bhubaneswar and he was dealing with processing of files to be sent to the Inspector General of Registration for registration of different organizations. Pankaj Kumar Chhualsingh (P.W.7) claiming himself as a member of "Patita Uddhar Samiti" - a voluntary organization, had approached the Appellant in his office for processing of the file for registration of the organization. It is alleged that the Appellant had demanded Rs.500/- (rupees five hundred) from said Pankaj Kumar Chhualsingh (P.W.7) to do his work. Going further into the fact it is found that, on 18.05.1998 the B.D.O., Bhubaneswar had submitted a report recommending for registration of the aforesaid Society. The file containing such recommendation of the B.D.O., Bhubaneswar was in the office of the Additional District Magistrate, Khurda at Bhubaneswar and the Appellant was dealing with that file. On the basis of the complaint, a trap was laid on the same day. Tainted G.C. Notes of Rs.500/- (five hundred) was detected from the second drawer of the table of the Appellant in presence of witnesses, Detection Report was prepared and the Appellant was ultimately chargesheeted.

(3.) The prosecution has examined nine witnesses to bring the charge to home against the Appellant. P.W.1 is the Collector & District Magistrate, Khurda and he had given the order of sanction. P.W.2 is the Assistant Director of State Forensic Science Laboratory, Bhubaneswar, P.W.3 is the accompanying / overhearing witness - a Junior Clerk in the Office of the Executive Engineer, Prachi Division, Bhubaneswar, P.W.4 is a Trap Witness who is stated to have brought out the tainted G.C. Note from the second drawer of the table of the Appellant and has tallied the numbers with the numbers there in the Preparation Report, P.W.5 is also a Trap Witness, P.W.7 is the Complainant, P.W.6 is a witness to the Seizure, P.W.8 is the Investigating Officer and P.W.9 is the Officer who led the trap party and detected the tainted G.C. Notes in the second drawer of the table of the Appellant and had taken the hand-wash of the Appellant which was collected in a clean bottle and was sent to the S.F.S.L., Bhubaneswar for chemical examination.