KARAMJIT KAUR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The crux of the facts culminating in the commencement, relevant for disposal of the instant petition and emanating from the record, is that Kewal Singh husband of the petitioner - complainant Karamjit Kaur (for brevity the complainant) was the owner of land in question. After his death, the mutation of inheritance was to be sanctioned in favour of his legal heirs in natural succession. She approached Gurmail Singh, Patwari to enter the mutation. He demanded Rs.40,000 - Rs.50,000/- from her as bribe to get the mutation sanctioned in their favour. She was stated to have already paid Rs.45,000/- as bribe to him by selling part of her land to one Hardayal Singh son of Buta Singh. According to the complainant that on 16.10.2003, she met the accused Gurmail Singh, Patwari and asked him to supply copy of Jamabandi of the land. He again demanded Rs.800/- as illegal gratification for the supply of copy of Jamabandi. However, she said that she has already paid Rs.45,000/- to him and being a poor lady she is unable to pay more bribe but in vain. Ultimately the deal was struck at Rs.500/- for the supply of copy of Jamabandi.

(2.) The case of the complainant further proceeds that on 17.10.2003, she along with PW Harjinder Singh went to the office of the Vigilance Bureau and reported the matter to the police. Thereafter trap was laid and Gurmail Singh, Patwari was caught red handed while accepting Rs.500/- as bribe from the complainant, which were later on handed over to Gurmeet Singh, Chowkidar. The accused were arrested at the spot after completion of all the requisite formalities. In the background of these allegations, a criminal case was registered against the accused Gurmail Singh, Patwari and Gurmeet Singh, Chowkidar by way of FIR No.71 dated 17.10.2003 for the commission of offence punishable under Sections 7 and 13 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).

(3.) Thereafter completion of the investigation, the Investigating Agency collected the evidence and submitted challan/final police report under Section 173 Criminal Procedure Code and the accused were put on trial. Ultimately, after extending the benefit/shadow of reasonable doubt, the accused were acquitted by the Special Judge, Moga vide judgement of acquittal dated 7.4.2007 (Annexure P-2). After the acquittal of the accused, the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vigilance, Moga, prepared the report and ordered the initiation of criminal proceedings against the complainant under Section 182 IPC vide impugned Calendar (Annexure P-3).