PRABHU DAYAL Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment dated 1.4.1998/order of sentence dated 2.4.1998 passed by the Court of learended Special Judge, Rohtak whereby he convicted and sentenced the accused Parbhu Dayal to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of 2,000/- under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (for brevity, 'the Act') and in default of payment of the same to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for one year.

(2.) SHORTLY put, the facts of the prosecution case are that on 22.3.1995 Deva Nand Pandey complainant resident of Panchkula employed as Supervisor in Nissant Benevolent Printing Press, Panchkula made application to the Director, Medical College, Rothak stating therein that stationery of this College was printed by the afore-mentioned Printing Press. On 19.3.1995, he came to collect payment of bill thereof for Rs. 1,02,185.10. The accused Parbhu Dayal Accountant asked him to come after two days. Accordingly, he came over there in the morning of 22.3.1995 and asked the accused to give him the draft of the said amount. The accused started putting him off on one pretext or the other. After a short while, he demanded bribe of Rs. 1,000/- from him for delivery of the draft to him and further told that the same would not be given to him without payment of the aforesaid bribe money. He (complainant) did not want to pay the same. So, he moved the above-mentioned application for necessary action. The same was forwarded to the Superintendent of Police, Rohtak, who marked it to the DSP to conduct the raid. Anil Dhawan SSP along with staff went at the Office of Deputy Commissioner, Rohtak in Mini Secretariat. Mr. T.V.S.N. Parsad, Additional Deputy Commissioner, Rohtak met there. On being informed about the application, he deputed Dharmpal Singh Yadav, City Magistrate, Rohtak to join the raiding party. Thereafter, the raiding party went to the Office of Dr. D.R. Yadav and officiating Director of Medical College Medical Superintendent we also joined in the raiding party. The complainant was present there. Dr. O.P. Lathwal, Deputy Medical Superintendent was also joined in the raiding party. The complainant gave ten currency notes each in the denomination of Rs. 100/- to the Deputy Superintendent of police vide memo in which their numbers were noted down. These notes were initialed by the DSP as well as the City Magistrate. After having applied the phenophathalein powder, these notes were handed over to the complainant vide memo with the instructions to go to the accused and pay him the same on his demand as bribe and thereafter to give signal by moving his hand on his head. Dr. Lathwal was sent as shadow witness with instructions to remain at some distance behind the complainant to watch the giving and taking of the said amount and to transmit the appointed signal to the remaining members of the raiding party after the transaction. Mr. Anil Dhawn DSP got registered the formal FIR. The complainant went to the accused in cashier room. Dr. Lathwal stood at some distance. The accused demanded the bribe money of Rs. 1,000/- The complainant paid the aforesaid marked currency notes to the accused, who counted the same and kept in the right hand pocket of his pant and gave authority letter and draft to the complainant, who came out in the gallery and gave the fixed signal to the shadow witness. Dr. Lathwal passed on the same to the remaining members of raiding party, which reached the spot and apprehended the accused. On being asked, the accused handed over such currency notes to the DSP. Their numbers tallied with the numbers mentioned in the memo. These currency notes were washed in the solution of sodium carbonate which turned pink. The same was converted into two parcels. The currency notes were also made into a parcel. The accused was arrested. After completion of investigation, the charge-sheet was laid in the Court for trail of the accused.

(3.) WHEN examined under Section 313 of Cr.P.C., the accused admitted that he was working as an Accountant in Medical College, Rohtak on 22.3.1995 and that the bill of Rs. 1,02,185.10 of the aforesaid printing press was due against this College as charges of the stationery etc., but he denied all the other incriminating circumstances appearing in the prosecution evidence against him and pleaded innocence. He has come up with the plea that he was called from his seat to the Office of Medical Superintendent and then to police Station, where he was falsely involved in this case at the instance of Dr. Lathwal, with whom he had previous enmity and that all the writing work was done in the police station. In his defence, he examined the Satish Kumar D.W. 1, Gulshan Kumar D.W. 2. After hearing the learned public prosecutor for the State, the learned defence counsel and examining the evidence on record, the learned trial Court convicted and sentenced the accused as noticed at the outset. Feeling aggrieved with the conviction/sentence, he has preferred this appeal.