MATHURA DASS GUPTA Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS judgment shall dispose of Crl. Appeal No. 4-SB of 1996 and Crl. Appeal No. 97-SBA of 1997. Criminal Appeal No. 4-SB of 1996 has been directed by Mathura Dass Gupta against the judgment of conviction dated 9.12.1995 and the order of sentence dated 11.12.1995, vide which he has been convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 1-1/2 years for the offence under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, (hereinafter referred as 'the Act') in case FIR No. 497 dated 27.12.1993 registered at Police Station Mahendergarh under Section 7 of the Act, whereas Crl. Appeal No. 97-SBA of 1997 has been directed by the State of Haryana against the judgment dated 1995, vide which accused Ami Lal has been acquitted in the aforesaid case.

(2.) AS per the prosecution version, accused Mathura Dass Gupta and Ami Lal were working as Assistant Foreman and Lineman in the office of Haryana State Electricity Board, Mahendergarh. On 27.12.1993, one Sheel Singh son of Prabhu Dayal, a resident of village Riwasa, (PW-1) made an application (Ex. PA) before Shri V. Raja Shekhar, IAS, Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Mahendergarh (PW-3) alleging therein that he had a tubewell in village Khatod and for the last three years, he has been contacting employees of the Electricity Board, Mahendergarh, for installing a transformer as the existing transformer was over loaded, but they did not instal the same. It was also alleged that a day before making the application (Ex. PA), the complainant went to the office where accused Mathura Dass Gupta demanded a sum of Rs. 1,000/- as bribe for doing the needful. Accused Mathura Dass Gupta had also told the complainant that if he was not available then the complainant should pay the amount to accused Ami Lal. On the said application, a raiding party was constituted by the SDM consisting himself, DSP Sat Parkash (PW-4), ASI Bharat Singh (PW-2) and a trap was laid. The currency notes of the denomination of Rs. 100/- were signed by the SDM and the complaintant and the shadow witness Bharat Singh were asked to go to the accused for making payment of bribe. Sheel Singh and Bharat Singh went inside the office of the accused whereas the other members of the raiding party i.e. SDM and DSP remained standing outside the office. As per the prosecution, Sheel Singh and Bharat Singh went to Mathura Dass Gupta accused in the office, who enquired whether Sheel Singh has brought the money. When he replied in affirmative, Mathura Dass Gupta accused came out of his office and told Sheel Singh to hand over the amount of bribe to accused Ami Lal, who was also present there. The complainant Sheel Singh then handed over the amount of Rs. 1,000/- to Ami Lal in presence of ASI Bharat Singh. Thereafter, ASI Bharat Singh gave signal to the raiding party, whereupon DSP and SDM came at the spot and caught hold both the accused. DSP Sat Parkash searched the person of Ami Lal accused and recovered currency notes of Rs. 10,000/- from his pocket. Thereafter, on the complaint made by the SDM, the aforesaid FIR was registered. After completion of investigation, challan was filed against both the accused.

(3.) IN his statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. accused Mathura Dass Gupta has pleaded that that his house was situated near the house of V. Raja Shekhar SDM and about two days before the occurrence, his buffalo strayed into the house of the SDM and had damaged his kitchen garden, as a result of which an altercation had taken place between them because of which the SDM has falsely implicated him in his case. However, in defence, no evidence was led. Accused Ami Lal, in his statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. pleaded innocence.