STATE OF H P Vs. GURCHARAN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the acquittal of accused by the trial court for offence under Section 161 I.P.C. and Section 5( 1 )(d)/5(2) of Prevent on of Corruption Act, 1947 hereinafter Corruption Act) by decision of 28-7-1989 in C.C. No.3 of 1988.

(2.) Briefly, the prosecution case is as under: Accused was posted as Gram Sewak at Tang Narwana, Development Block, Nagrota Bagwan of District Kangra in the year 1986. Ram Nath (PW 6) is the resident to village Ramehar in Tehsil and District Kangra. His village falls within the Development Block of Nagrota Bagwan. He was identified and covered under the Integrated Rural Development Programme (hereinafter IRDP) of the State Government. His name appears in the directory of IRDP beneficiaries of this Block. Allegation against the accused is that the duty of the accused was to verify and forward the applications of such persons for grant of subsidy. Ram Nath wanted loan and subsidy under the IRDP programme for the purchase of two mules. He got his application verified from the Patwari Halqa and handed over the same to the accused on 29-91966 for further action. Accused demanded Rs. 100/- as illegal gratification for doing this work. He told Ram Nath that he would not forward his application unless he was paid Rs. 100/-. Accused persisted the demand, although, Ram Nath had gone to him three to four times. On 3-10-1986 when the demand was repeated by the accused, Ram Nath agreed to pay this amount on the next morning. On 4-10-1986 Ram Nath went to the office of Anti Corruption Unit of the State Police at Dharamshala. He disclosed to Inspector Surinder Singh about this demand of the accused for forwarding the application. He also told the Inspector that on the previous day, he had promised the accused regarding payment of the amount. Statement of Ram Nath was recorded, on which First Information Report No.6 of 1986 was registered by the Police Station Anti Corruption Unit, Dharamshala. Inspector Surinder Singh, Head Constable Sansar, Singh, Constable Jagdish Singh and Ram Nath came to village Tang Narwana in a bus. Inspector Surinder Singh asked Ram Nath to bring two witnesses. Accordingly, Jai Karan (PW 7) and Pritam Singh (PW 8) were brought. Inspector Surinder Singh associated these witnesses with the trap. Ram Nath produced Rs. 100/- (nine currency notes in the denomination of Rs. 10/- and two of Rs. 5/-). These notes were taken into possession vide recovery memo Ext. P.L. Their numbers were noted in the memo. They were treated with phenolphthelin powder. Pockets of Ram Nath were searched and nothing was found in them. These currency notes were handed over to Ram Nath in the presence of Pritam Singh and Jai Karan. Memorandum of proceedings (Ext. PM) was prepared. Ram Nath was instructed to hand over these currency notes by the accused on demand by him. He was also instructed to give signal after the acceptance of the currency notes by the accused. Ram Nath went to the office of accused while the remaining members of the raiding party concealed themselves in the nearby rain-shelter. After sometime Ram Nath came out in the verandah and raised his arm. Inspector Surinder Singh and other members of his party rushed to the office of accused. Inspector Surinder Singh introduced himself and asked the accused to hand over the currency notes he had accepted as illegal gratification from Ram Nath. Accused took out these currency notes from the ticket pocket of his pant and handed them over to the Inspector Surinder Singh. Accused was made to wash his hands in sodium carbonate water. The water turned pink. The water was put in a bottle and sealed. A memorandum (Ext. PM) was prepared. The numbers of the currency notes produced by the accused, were compared with the numbers already recorded in the seizure memo (Ext. PL). They tallied. A memo was prepared and currency notes in terms of Exts. P. 5 to P. 15 were taken into possession. They were also scaled. Accused was arrested. Ticket pocket of his pant was also washed in sodium carbonate solution which turned pink. This solution was also put in a bottle (Ext. P. 16). Memo (Ext. P. 17) was prepared. Site plan (Ext. P.R.) was also drawn. Ultimately, the matter came to the court. There are accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. He has not denied the receipt of the am6unt from Ram Nath and recovered by Inspector Surinder Singh. He also admitted that his hands were washed in the water. But according to him, the powder was added to the water and not that water turned pinkish when he washed his hands. He also admits that he was asked to remove his pant and the ticket pocket of his pant was washed in water solution of sodium carbonate which turned pink and that the pant was taken into possession by the police. His explanation about receiving of amount is that in 1986 people suffered damage to their houses and other properties in the earthquake, the Government directed that relief benefit to the IRDP families would be double as compared to other persons. In village Ramehar only two persons were issued the copies to benefit extension. Ram Nath could not be issued the copy, therefore, was deprived of the double benefit of the earthquake relief. Though, he made those copies (Vikas Patrika), he sent the same to the Block Development Officer. Since the Block Development Officer was on leave, copies could not be issued to persons including Ram Nath. Accused further explains that Ram Nath became inimical to him. He had complained to Project Officer and Deputy Commissioner also, that he (accused) charges Rs. 25/- for the issuance of the copy. Ram Nath was friendly with S.E.B.P.O in the office of Block Development Officer. They both hatched the plan for implicating him in a corruption case.

(3.) Ram Nath had taken some plants and DandartiT from him on loan in the month of July, 1986. Ram Nath approached him for DandartiT saying that he would get some scheduled caste to fill and get the form attested from Pradhan of the Panchayat since subsidy to the scheduled caste persons for purchase of DandartiT was considerably high. At the time, Prem Chand was also sitting with him. He gave DandartiT to Ram Nath, who promised to pay money within two days or so. In the meanwhile, plants demanded by Ram Nath also arrived. He was informed and he took these plants also. On several occasions, he was asked to pay the money for DandartiT and plants taken by him. Ultimately, he paid the amount of Rs. 100/- on 4-10-1986, which were recovered by the police from him on the date of occurrence. Parties produced evidence before the trial court. The accused was acquitted by the impugned judgment for reasons recorded in para-l 7 thereof, hence this appeal by the State assailing the acquittal of the accused.