STATE OF HARYANA Vs. SUBHASH CHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Respondent Subhash Chand working as SDO In Haryann State Agriculture Marketing Board, was booked in FIR No. 39 dated 20.9.2002, registered in Police Station State Vigilance Bureau (SVB), Ambala, under Sections 7/13 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (for short 'the Act'). Vide impugned judgment of learned Special Judge, Kaithal he stands acquitted. Aggrieved by the same, State of Haryana has preferred the instant appeal along with a Miscellaneous Application bearing Crl. Misc. No. 590-MA of 2006 under Sec. 378(3) of Code Criminal Procedure seeking grant of leave to appeal.

(2.) I have heard Mr. Dinesh Arora, AAG, Haryana for the appellant and Dr. Surya Parkash, Advocate, for the respondent. With their assistance I have gone through the records.

(3.) The present case was registercc on a written application of Babu Ram (Ex. PE) to Inspector, State Vigilance, Kaithal against the respondent alleging that he was demanding Rs. 1,500.00 as bribe for releasing balance amount of his payment. Thereafter, Inspector Vigilance along with police officials went to the office of Deputy Commissioner, Kaithal requesting him to depute some Gazetted Officer to join in the raiding party. Consequently, City Magistrate Kaithal was put on duty for the said purpose. All the formalities of handing over the currency notes to the complainant were then completed. Phenolphthalein powder (PP Powder) was also applied on the currency notes, they were initialled and handed over to the complainant. Head Constable Ram Kumar was deputed as shadow witness with certain specific directions. It is then the case of the prosecution that when complainant handed over Rs. 1,500.00 (initialled currency notes), the shadow witness gave the fix signal and thereafter the raiding-party reached the spot and nabbed the respondent. Other required formalities were also completed at the spot and ultimately after the report of the FSL, the challan was submitted against the respondents who was charged under Sections 7, 13(1)(d) and 13(2) of prevention of Corruption Act,