SURINDER KUMAR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved of conviction in FIR No. 40 dtd. 17/7/2000 under Ss. 7 and 13(1)(d) read with Sec. 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, (for short the Act) registered at Police Station Vigilance Bureau, Jalandhar, Surinder Kumar (appellant) is in appeal.

(2.) The facts as set up by the prosecution are that on 17/7/2001, a complaint was made by Sarvesh Bharti. He stated that he was dealing with the advertisement concerning Punjab Technical University (for short' the University') in the newspapers 'Punjab Kesri' and 'Jagbani' and rest of the newspapers were being dealt with by other advertising agencies. On 13/7/2001, the complainant met the appellant posted as PA to Vice Chancellor of the University (for short, 'VC') and requested for release of advertisement for 'Daily Ajit' and 'Tribune Group' newspapers. The appellant demanded Rs.10,000.00 as illegal gratification and the deal was struck for Rs.5,000.00. On the complaint, trap was laid. Ten notes of the denomination of Rs.500.00 were laced with Phenolphthalein Powder. Ganga Baksh who went along with the complainant to the Vigilance Bureau office was made the shadow witness. Samittar Singh and Gobind Singh were the official witnesses. After instructing the complainant and the shadow witness, the raiding party reached the University. On receiving signal from the shadow witness, the raiding party went to the spot and secured the appellant from both hands. The laced currency was recovered from the left side pocket of the shirt of the appellant. On washing of his hands and pocket of the shirt with Sodium Carbonate solution, the colour turned pink. On receiving sanction, charges under Ss. 7 and 13(1)(d) of the Act were framed.

(3.) The prosecution to support its case examined nine witnesses. (From the perusal of record, it is forthcoming that two prosecution witnesses were numbered as PW7).