AMRIT PAL SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant was tried qua commission of offence punishable under Sections 7 and 13 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (for short 'the Act') in FIR No.29 dated 31.5.2000 registered at Police Station Vigilance Bureau, Jalandhar along with his co-accused Paramjit Singh. Learned Special Judge, vide judgment/ order dated 15.1.2004 convicted and sentenced the appellant qua commission of offence punishable under Section 7 read with Section 13 (2) of the Act. However, co-accused Paramjit Singh was acquitted of the charges framed against him. Hence, the present appeal by accused Amrit Pal Singh.

(2.) Prosecution story, in brief, is that complainant Gulzar Singh had sought loan under the Special Employment Programme in order to purchase the machinery for starting business of making jute strings. The application was filed by complainant Gulzar Singh in the office of the Board on 29.2.2000. Complainant met the appellant in connection with the grant of loan. Complainant then went to the office of the Board on 15.5.2000 along with Karamjit Chander and met the appellant. Appellant raised a demand of Rs. 2,000/- from the complainant. However, the matter was settled at Rs. 500/- and the complainant made a false promise to meet the said demand on 31.5.2000. Thereafter, complainant met Paras Ram, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vigilance Bureau on 31.5.2000 and got recorded his statement with regard to demand of bribe made by the accused from him. Complainant handed over five currency notes in the denomination of Rs. 100/- each to Deputy Superintendent of Police, who, in turn, returned the same to the complainant after application of Phenol Phthalein Powder (P-Powder for short) on them. The numbers of the currency notes were noted down in memo Ex.PC. Demonstration of the working of the P-Powder was given to the complainant and the other witness by the Deputy Superintendent of Police. Harvinder Singh and Gopal Kishore Agnihotri were joined as independent witnesses. Karamjit Chander was deputed to act as a shadow witness and was instructed to give a signal to the raiding party after the bribe money was accepted by the appellant.

(3.) Thereafter the raiding party reached the office of the appellant. The complainant and the shadow witness entered the office of the appellant. Complainant handed over Rs. 200/- to accused Paramjit Singh and Rs. 300/- to the appellant on demand. On receipt of signal from the shadow witness, Deputy Superintendent of Police along with the remaining raiding party entered the office of the appellant. When the fingers of the appellant were dipped in a solution of sodium carbonate, the colour of the solution turned pink. The tainted currency notes amounting to Rs. 300/- were recovered from the left pant pocket of the appellant. When the left pant pocket of the appellant was dipped in a solution of sodium carbonate, the colour of the solution turned pink. Thereafter, the raiding party went to the office of accused Paramjit Singh. When the fingers of accused Paramjit Singh were dipped in a solution of sodium carbonate, the colour of the solution turned pink. The tainted currency notes amounting to Rs. 200/- were recovered from the shirt pocket of the said accused. When the shirt pocket of accused Paramjit Singh was dipped in a solution of sodium carbonate, the colour of the solution turned pink.