PRASANTA GOSWAMI Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant was convicted under Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1) (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and under Section 314 of the IPC and sentenced to suffer R.I. for one year and fine of Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees five thousand), both the sentences being directed to run concurrently, vide judgment and order dated 30.9.2005 rendered by the learned Special Judge at Guwahati in Special Case No. 5(A)/2001. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment, the appellant preferred this appeal under Section 374(2) CrPC, 1973.

(2.) THE short facts of the prosecution in this case are that the Deputy SP, CID, Assam lodged a written FIR with the Special Superintendent of Police, CID Assam, Guwahati informing that having received a petition on 21.8.1998 from one Ms. Kalyani Sarmah and having recorded it as GDE No. 125 on 21.8.1998, he made an enquiry and found that CID Inspector Aswini Das and CID constable Prasanta Goswami, in collusion with 4/5 others attempted to extort an amount of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand) from milkmen named Kishore Chetri, Ramu and R.P. Sarmah accusing them of selling adulterated milk and threatening to take action against them. In a trap laid by police, Prasanta Goswami, CID constable was caught red handed by a team of CID officers on 21.8.1998 at 14.20 hours when he was exhorting cash amount of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees then thousand) from the petitioner and other milk businessmen. On the basis of said FIR, a crime being CID PS Case No. 19/1998 was registered under Section 384 IPC read with Section 13(1) ( c) and (d) (ii) (iii) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to a the P.C. Act in short). On completion of investigation, charge-sheet was submitted against the constable Prasanta Goswami, Inspector Aswini Kumar Das and constable Dipen Gogoi under Sections 120(B)/109/384 IPC read with Section 13(1) (d) (ii) (iii) punishable under Section 13 (ii) of the P.C. Act. On the basis of the materials collected during investigation, learned trial court framed charges against the above named accused persons under Sections 120(B)/354 IPC and Section 13 (2) read with Section 13 (1) (d) of the P.C. Act. THE charges being read over and explained the accused persons denied the same, pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

(3.) I have heard Mr. B. M. Choudhury, learned counsel for the convict appellant and Mr. K. Munir, learned Addl. P.P., Assam, for the respondent State. I have thoroughly scanned the evidence of the prosecution witnesses and the LCRs.