PREM LATA Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appeal has been filed by the appellant against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 18.03.2004, passed by learned Special Judge, Patiala, whereby the accused -appellant was held guilty and convicted under Sections 7 and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/ - and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three months under each Section. Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) THE brief facts of the prosecution case are that FIR in the present case was registered on the basis of statement of Paramjit Singh, complainant, which he got recorded before DSP Vigilance Flying Squad -II, Patiala, wherein he mainly stated that his sister Sarabjit Kaur is married with Ram Singh, who was liquor addict. Earlier, Ram Singh sold the land to some other person. Then, Ram Singh sold 9 acres of land to his son Harinder and the mutation of which had to be sanctioned. Mutation was got entered with the Patwari and the same was to be finalized by the Naib Tehsildar Prem Lata accused. Mutation was not sanctioned by the accused. They again met the accused and the Patwari told them that they have to pay some money for getting the mutation sanctioned. Then, complainant talked to accused regarding sanctioning of the mutation and the accused demanded Rs. 4000/ - as bribe from him and the matter was settled at Rs. 2000/ -. Then, complainant went to Vigilance office on 07.05.1999 and narrated the demand of bribe. J.E. Devinder Singh was called by the DSP in his office. The demonstration after applying powder to the currency notes was given. A raid was planned, which was conducted after joining Balbir Singh as shadow witness and the currency notes were recovered from the drawer of the table of accused and numbers of same were tallied with the memo already prepared. After necessary investigating, challan was presented against the accused -appellant.

(3.) IN support of its case, prosecution examined PW -1 MHC Gurbej Singh and PW -2 Head Constable Harinder Singh, who are formal witnesses and tendered into evidence their affidavits Ex. PA and PB respectively. PW -3 Talwinder Singh, Patwari mainly deposed that he entered mutation in the register in favour of Harinder Singh. He produced the mutation register along with photocopy of the sale deed and special power of attorney before the Vigilance officials i.e. DSP Vigilance Bureau, which was taken into possession. When he has not supported some facts in chief -examination, when he was declared hostile and was cross -examined by Public Prosecutor and he admitted that he said in his statement that on 07.05.1999 he produced before Prem Lata, Naib Tehsildar accused in her office one mutation register Ex. P1, photocopy of the sale deed dated 04.01.1999 executed by Ram Singh in favour of Harinder Singh and special power of attorney for sanctioning the mutation. PW -4 Kartar Singh, Superintendent, Office of Commissioner Patiala Division mainly deposed regarding the sanction Ex. PC/1 by identifying the signatures of Commissioner Patiala Division Sh. D.S. Kalha, IAS. PW -5 Lady Constable Kamaljit Kaur mainly deposed that on 07.05.1999, she went with DSP Ranjit Singh along with other police officials. Lady Constable Mangaljit Kaur was also with them. Accused present in the Court, who was working as Naib Tehsildar at that time, was apprehended. From her personal search, two gold bangles, one gold ring then said two gold ring, one gold chain with locket, one lady purse containing Rs. 1820/ - and one identity card with driving licence were taken into police possession vide recovery memo Ex. PF. PW -6 Devinder Singh J.E., who is recovery witness, also deposed as per prosecution version and deposed regarding the raid and further regarding recovery of bribe money of Rs. 2000/ - i.e. twenty notes of Rs. 100/ -, which were recovered from the right drawer of the table of the accused. PW -7 Amar Singh mainly deposed regarding signing as witness on the Special Power of Attorney and also deposed regarding registered sale deed dated 30.12.1998. PW -8 Balbir Singh, who was the shadow witness, has not supported the prosecution version and turned hostile. PW -9 Paramjit Singh, complainant deposed regarding the demand of Rs. 4000/ - bribe by the accused -appellant for sanctioning the mutation, which was later on settled at Rs. 2000/ -. He also deposed regarding raid that after giving Rs. 2000/ - to the accused -appellant, he gave signal to Balbir Singh, shadow witness, who was standing outside the room but was visible to him. He further deposed that accused kept the bribe money in the drawer of the table. After receipt of the same, DSP and raiding party, reached the spot. He also deposed regarding recovery of bribe money and deposed as per prosecution version. PW -10 Ranjit Singh Dhillon, S.P. Crime, the then DSP Vigilance Flying Squad -II, deposed as per prosecution version and investigation conducted by him in the present case. PW -11 Bhag Singh, DSP (Retd.) deposed regarding partly investigation conducted by him in this case.