PRITAM SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been filed by Pritam Singh, Cashier of Primary Health Centre, Alamwala in district Faridkot, against the order of the Special Judge, Faridkot, dated February 2, 1985, by which he was convicted under Section 5(2) read with Section 5(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and sentenced to undergo one year's rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/ -. He was further convicted under Section 161, Indian Penal Code, and sentenced to undergo one year's rigorous imprisonment. Both the sentences of imprisonment were ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) THE prosecution case is that the complainant Jagtar Singh (PW1) was working as Computer Clerk in the Primary Health Centre, Alamwala, where the appellant was working as Bill Clerk. The complainant remained on leave from June 21, 1983 to January 2, 1984 and Joined his duty on January 3, 1984. The pay bill for the month of January, 1984 of the complainant and other members of staff of the Primary Health Centre was to be prepared by the appellant on January 31, 1984. On that day the complainant requested the appellant to add House Rent Allowance in his pay bill. To do so the appellant demanded bribe of Rs. 50/ -. The bargain was, however, struck at Rs. 25/ -. It was agreed that the complainant will pay this amount to the appellant on February 1, 1984 and then the appellant will submit his pay bill inclusive of the House Rent Allowance. The complainant decided not to pay the bribe to the appellant. He along with Lal Chand (PW2) went to Gurbachan Singh,Vigilance Inspector (PW 7), on the morning of February 1, 1984. The Inspector recorded the statement of the complainant (Exhibit PA) on the basis of which a formal First Information Report was recorded against the appellant. The complainant was entrusted with two currency notes of Rs. 20/ - and Rs. 5/ - respectively on which phenolphthalein powder was applied. He was directed by the Inspector to hand over the currency notes to be appellant as bribe. Lal Chand (PW2) was deputed to act as a shadow witness. Then the complainant and Lal Chand were sent to the Primary Health Centre to pass over the bribe money to the appellant. The Vigilance Inspector followed them and joined Ashok Kumar (PW3) in the raiding party. When the complainant followed by Lal Chand (PW2) met the appellant at the Primary Health Centre, the latter demanded the bribe whereupon the complainant handed over the aforesaid currency notes to him which the complainant put in his coat -pocket. On the agreed signal having been given by Lal Chand (PW2),the Vigilance Inspector and the other members of the raiding party rushed to the spot and recovered incriminating currency notes from the personal search of the appellant. After completion of the investigation the appellant was charged and prosecuted with the aforesaid result.

(3.) FOR the conviction of an accused under Section 5(2) of the Act it is incumbent upon the prosecution to prove that he had demanded the bribe from the complainant and thereafter accepted the same. These ingredients in the instant case are sought to be proved by the prosecution from the solitary statement of the complainant Jagtar Singh (PW1). The Shadow witness Lal Chand (PW2) did not lend his support to the prosecution case. He deposed that in his presence the appellant did not demand any bribe from the complainant and that after some talk which he did not hear the complainant handed over the incriminating currency notes to the appellant who put the same in his coat -pocket from where the Vigilance Inspector recovered them. This witness was allowed to be cross -examined by the prosecution but he failed to admit that in his presence the appellant had demanded bribe from the complainant.