RAMESH CHAND Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this order, I shall dispose of Criminal Appeal No.1401-SB of 2003 against the judgment and order dated 19.7.2003/21.7.2003, passed by the learned Special Judge, Jagadhri, vide which the appellant was convicted under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (in short, the Act) and sentenced to undergo RI for two years and fine of Rs.2000/-, in default thereof, to further undergo RI for six months.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that on 6.2.2001, Jagdish Kumar complainant moved a complaint (Ex.PE) before Phool Chand, Inspector Vigilance Bureau, alleging that he intended to obtain a loan of Rs.20,000/- for opening a grocery shop from Haryana Harijan Kalyan Nigam (in short, the Nigam). He had been making repeated visits to the office but his loan was not being sanctioned. On 5.2.2001, he went to the office, where Ramesh Kumar Field Officer of the Nigam had demanded Rs.2000/- as bribe for getting the loan sanctioned. However, after negotiation, the matter was settled at Rs.1000/-. Jagdish Kumar stated that he is a poor man and does not want to pay the bribe. On the basis of the said complaint, the police registered a case at State Vigilance Bureau, Ambala. Shri I.P.Bishnoi, City Magistrate was joined in the raid. The police completed the formalities of handing over one currency note of Rs.500/- denomination and five currency notes of Rs.100/- denomination, after putting their initials on each note and treated them with phenolphthalein powder and directed the complainant to hand over the same to accused. Ashok Kumar was shadow witness with the police party. Accordingly, the complainant visited the office of the accused and after handing over tainted notes amounting to Rs.1000/- to the accused, signalled the shadow witness, who in turn, signalled the raiding party. The police party then conducted the raid. Tainted notes were recovered from the accused. Hand wash was also done, on which colour of the solution went pink. The loan file was also taken into possession. After investigation, challan was presented in Court. Accused was charge sheeted under Section 7 read with Section 13 of the Act to which he pleaded not guilty.

(3.) In support, of its case, the prosecution examined PW1 Raj Kumar Singla, Superintendent HSFDC, PW2 Vijay Kumar, Record Keeper, PW3 Tejinder Kumar ASI, PW4 Mulakh Raj Constable, PW5 Constable Mehroof Ali, PW6 Constable Joginder Singh, PW7 Ashok Kumar, Shadow Witness, PW8 Jagdish Kumar complainant, PW9 Inder Pal Bishnoi, City Magistrate, Narnaul and PW10, Phool Chand, Inspector.