AB HAMID DAR Vs. STATE OF J&K

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AGGRIEVED by the order dated 17.2.2009 of the Special Judge Anti -corruption Kashmir, Srinagar, framing charge under Sections 5(1)(d) and Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and Section 161 R.P.C, the petitioner has approached this Court seeking quashing of the proceedings before the Special Judge, on the ground that in view of the complainants statement recorded under Section 164 -A Cr.P.C, saying that he was undergoing mental tension when he had complained against the petitioner that he had demanded bribe from him for sanctioning leave, the charge against him was unsustainable.

(2.) PETITIONERS plea raised in this behalf has been repelled by the Learned Special Judge on the ground that in view of the statements of the other prosecution witnesses, supporting the constitution of the Trap team, recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C, and recovery of the bribe money of 500 rupees from the petitioner, the latter statement of the complainant recorded under Section 164 -A Cr.P.C, giving a version contrary to the one appearing in the complainants statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C, cannot be considered to be evidence of clinching nature to disbelieve the other evidence on records, which revealed prima facie commission of offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act and the Ranbir Penal Code by the petitioner.

(3.) I do not find any error in the view taken by the learned Special Judge, for, the complainants statement made under Section 164 -A Cr.P.C, cannot be construed to nullify his earlier statement made under Section 161 Cr.P.C, supporting the prosecution case, unless he had subjected himself for cross -examination by the prosecution during trial of the case.