STATE OF H.P. Vs. PADAM DEV

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment dated 27.8.2010, rendered by learned Special Judge (Forests), Shimla, in Corruption Case No. 9 -S/7 of 2008, whereby the accused/respondent, Padam Dev, who was charged with and tried for offences punishable under Section 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, has been acquitted.

(2.) THE case of the prosecution, in a nutshell, is that PW1 Raj Kumar, complainant, had applied for issuance of a goods tax certificate commonly known as gata copy in local parlance. The accused delayed the matter on one pretext or the other. Ultimately, the accused demanded a sum of Rs. 2500/ - from Raj Kumar. On this, Raj Kumar filed a complaint with the State Vigilance and Anti Corruption Bureau, Khalini. According to him, he had purchased one Tata Sumo bearing registration No. HP -01A -3734. He was running it as Taxi. He had applied for goods tax certificate on 22.11.2005. The matter was delayed unnecessarily by the accused. Thereafter, the police registered an FIR vide Ext. PW8/A. A trap was laid. Currency notes of Rs. 2500/ - were treated with phenolphthalein powder and a memorandum of demonstration was also made. Raj Kumar was handed over treated currency notes of Rs. 2500/ - with a direction to hand over the money to the accused and give signal to the trap party. The complainant handed over the money to the accused and thereafter on signal being received, trap party apprehended the accused and his hands were got washed with sodium carbonate solution. The hand wash turned pink. The accused produced currency notes of Rs. 2500/ -, numbers whereof were tallied with the pre -trap memorandum. The currency notes were taken into possession. The accused was arrested and the documents were seized in accordance with law. The investigation was completed and the challan was put up in the trial court after completing all the codal formalities.

(3.) LEARNED Special Judge (Forests) acquitted the accused vide judgment dated 27.8.2010, as noticed above. Hence, the appeal.