(1.) The present appeal has been preferred against the judgment of conviction dated 01.11.2010, passed by learned Special Judge, Hisar, vide which appellant Jai Narain has been held guilty and convicted for the offence punishable under Sec. 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (here -in -after referred as 'the Act') and the order on the quantum of sentence of the even dated, vide which appellant has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/ -, in default of payment of fine to further undergo imprisonment for six months.
(2.) The sequence of the events leading to this prosecution are that on 31.01.2007, PW12 complainant Ram Niwas moved application Ex. P24 to the Superintendent of Police, Vigilance, Rohtak alleging therein that he is an agriculturist. His brother Ram Bhagat had the land measuring 1 1/2 acre in the village. Accused -appellant Jai Narain, Patwari Halqa Petwar -II is demanding a sum of Rs. 1000/ - for the mutation. They both the brothers are joint. He does not want to give the money. He has no faith in the officials of the Vigilance Bureau, Hisar. Hence that application.
(3.) PW14 Inspector Kanwar Singh made his endorsement Ex. P30 on the said application and sent the same to Police Station, State Vigilance Bureau, Hisar. On the basis of which, FIR Ex. P3 was registered. PW14 Inspector Kanwar Singh formed a raiding party. He reached at Hisar and moved the application Ex. P31 to the Deputy Commissioner, Hisar for deputing the Duty Magistrate. PW10 Mahender Kumar, Tehsildar was deputed as Duty Magistrate. The Investigating Officer along with the complainant, the Duty Magistrate and the other police officials proceeded towards Narnaund to lay the trap. When they reached near Police Station Narnaund, the complainant produced two currency notes of denomination of Rs. 500/ - each to the Investigating Officer. The said currency notes were initialled by PW14 Inspector Kanwar Singh and PW10 Mahender Kumar, Tehsildar. Thereafter, the phenolphthalein powder was applied on both the currency notes and same were handed over to complainant Ram Niwas vide memo Ex. P5. He was instructed to hand -over the said bribe money to the accused on his demand and after giving bribe, gave signal to PW17 Constable Sudama, the shadow witness, who was further instructed to give the agreed signal to the raiding party. The complainant and the shadow witness were sent to the Patwar Khana and remaining police party waited behind the tractor -trolly standing near the Patwar Khana. After sometime, on receiving the signal from the shadow witness, the police party reached at the spot and apprehended the accused -appellant. The Investigating Officer asked the appellant to hand -over the bribe money but he was adamant. At this, the Investigating Officer conducted search of the accused and the tainted currency notes were recovered from the pocket of his shirt. Serial numbers of said currency notes were tallied with the entrustment memo and same were also having the signatures of the Investigating Officer and Mahender Singh, Tehsildar. Thereafter, the hand wash and pocket wash of the accused -appellant were taken in the solution of sodium carbonate. The tainted currency notes were also washed in said solution separately. The said solution was stored in separate sealed nips. The tainted currency notes, the nips containing the solution and the shirt of the accused -appellant were taken into possession vide separate recovery memos after preparing the sealed parcels. The seal after use was entrusted to PW5 SI Ram Narain. The accused -appellant was arrested. The articles of the case property were deposited in intact condition in the Malkhana of Police Station, State Vigilance Bureau, Hisar. The further investigation was conducted by PW15 DSP Subhash Chander of State Vigilance Bureau, Hisar. After obtaining the requisite sanction for prosecution and on completion of formalities of the investigation, the report under Sec. 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (here -in -after referred as the 'Cr.P.C.') was presented in the Court.