RAMESH CHANDER Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RAMESH Chander, accused was working as a Superintendent in the Markfed Branch, Kapurthala. Charanjit Singh (PW-1), the complainant, was an ex-employee of the said office, who had been dismissed from service. Some of the amounts due to Charanjit Singh had been paid to him but certain amounts remained to be paid. He accordingly approached Ramesh Chander and asked for his intervention to secure the balance amount. On 22.12.1993, Ramesh Chander told the complainant that he had been transferred from his post and would be leaving charge within 2-3 days and that he (Charanjit Singh) should pay Rs. 1,000/- to him so that he could persuade his successor for securing the clearance of the arrears, failing which he would create obstacles in his way. Charanjit Singh, however, expressed his inability to pay Rs. 1,000/- and the bargain was struck at Rs. 700/-. Charanjit Singh, however, went to the Vigilance Office and reported the matter to Inspector Sukhwinder Singh (PW-5), who recorded Charanjit Singh's statement, Exh. PA. He then handed over seven currency notes to Inspector Sukhwinder Singh, who after noting down the numbers of the notes in the memo, Exh. PB, and sprinkling them with phenolphthalein power, returned them to Charanjit Singh with a direction as to how the trap was to be set up. Kanwaljit Singh (PW-2) was directed to accompany Charanjit Singh as a shadow witness and he was instructed to give a signal after the money had been handed over to the accused on his demand. An FIR, Exh. PA-2, was also registered in the police station. One Sodhi Ram from the office of the B.D.O. was also associated as a witness. After the money had been handed over to the accused, Kanwaljit Singh PW gave a signal and the raid was carried out and the tainted money was recovered from the pocket of the accused in the presence of Sh. K.S. Walia PW-4, the General Manager of the Markfed. The hands of the accused were also washed in a solution of sodium carbonate and the same turned pink. It was also found that the number of the currency notes, Exh. P-1 to Exh. P-7, tallied with the numbers noted in the memo, Exh. PB, prepared by Inspector Sukhwinder Singh. The accused was accordingly arrested and was sent up for trial for offences punishable under Section 7 read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and as he pleaded not guilty, was brought to trial.

(2.) IN support of its case, the prosecution examined PW-1, Charanjit Singh, the complainant; PW-2 Kanwaljit Singh, the shadow witness, who turned hostile; PW-4 Sh. K.S. Walia, the General Manager of the Markfed, who proved the recovery of the currency notes from the accused; and PW-5 Inspector Sukhwinder Singh, the Investigating Officer, Sodhi Ram was, however, not examined.

(3.) THE trial Court held that the fact that Kanwaljit Singh (PW-2), a shadow witness having turned hostile and Sodhi Ram having not been examined, did not, in any way, prejudice the prosecution story as it was fully supported by the evidence of Charanjit Singh (PW-1), Sh. K.S. Walia (PW-4), the General Manager of the Markfed and Inspector Sukhwinder Singh (PW-5). The trial Court also held that the stand of the accused that no amount was pending with respect to Charanjit's claim was incorrect as an objection with regard to Rs. 19,600/- had been raised on 20.10.1993 and the matter had been referred to the Head Office for clearance. The Court also held that the employees of the Markfed were subjected to trial under the Prevention of Corruption Act and having held as above, convicted the accused for an offence punishable under Section 7 read with Section 13(2) of the Act and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for four years and to pay a fine of Rs. 4,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for six months.