RAM LAL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal by the accused Ram Lal is directed against the judgment of learned Special Judge for ACD cases Rajasthan Jaipur dated 29th Oct., 1975 convicting him under Sec. 161 Penal Code and sentenced him to six months Simple Imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 200.00, in default of payment of fine to undergo further simple imprisonment for one month and conviction under Sec. 5 (1) (d) read with Section 5 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 and sentencing him to one year's simple imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 500.00, in default of payment of fine further imprisonment for three months.

(2.) Briefly stated the prosecution case is that the accused Ram Lal while working as reader in the court of Additional Munsif and Magistrate First Class No. 2, Jaipur City, demanded Rs. 5.00 from Jagdish PW 5 who was a defendant in an ejectment case for giving an adjournment in the case. According to Jagdish PW 5 he used to give Rs. 2/- earlier to the accused for giving dates but on 22nd May, 1973, the accused made a demand of Rs. 5.00 in future. Jagdish did not want to pay Rs. 5.00 as such he went in the A.C.D. on 25th May, 1973 and submitted a report Ex. P 4 in this regard. Jagdish gave five currency notes of Re. 1/- each whose particulars were noted down and after putting phenolphthalein powder the same were returned to Jagdish with the instructions that the said notes may be given to the accused on demand and a signal may also be given after the notes having been received by the accused. As these proceedings were taken in the A. C. D. in the presence of motbirs Roop Narain PW 6 and Kanhaiya Lal PW 7. Jagdish then came in the court and found the accused seated by the side of the Presiding Officer. At that time arguments were going on in his case. The accused rose from his seat and came near the seat whose window was opening in the verandah. Jagdish then gave Rs. 5.00 to the accused, who after taking the notes put the same in the pocket of Bush shirt. Jagdish then gave a signal and on this the Additional Superintendent of Police, Incharge A.C.D. Shri Khem Chand Tejwani PW 10 entered the Court. By that time the accused had returned back on the seat lying by the side of the Presiding Officer. PW 10 Shri Tejwani disclosed his identity to the Presiding Officer Shri Mahesh Singh PW 8 and recovered the notes from the pocket of the accused. PW 10 Tejwani then summoned fresh water in a glass and mixed Sodium Carbonate and thereafter got the fingers of the accused dipped in the said water and the colour of the water turned into pink. The said water was put in a bottle Art. 6 and was sealed. The bushshirt of the accused was also seized and the pocket of the bush-shirt was also washed by mixing Sodium Carbonate powder and this water also turned pink. The wash of the bush-shirt was also sealed in bottles Articles 7 and 8 and the bush-shirt is Art. 9. The articles 6 and 8 were sent for chemical examination and according to the report of the Chemical Examiner Ex. P 9 the same were found positive. PW 10 Shri Tejwani after obtaining the sanction for prosecution and usual investigation filed a challan against the accused. A charge under Sec. 161 Penal Code and Sec. 5 (2) read with Sec. 5 (1) (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act for accepting the sum of Rs. 5.00 a gratification other than legal remuneration as a motive etc. for doing or forbearing to do an official act, namely, for adjourning the case to a date of the convenience of Jagdish Prasad, as Public servant from Jagdish son of Ratan Lal, was framed against the accused. The accused denied the charge and claimed to be tried. The prosecution in support of its case examined 10 witnesses. The accused in his explanation though admitted the recovery of Rs. 5.00 from his pocket, but his explanation was that the said notes were put by somebody in his pocket without his knowledge and he neither made a demand nor accepted the said notes from Jagdish. The accused also examined DW 1 Radhey Shyam and DW 2 Babu Sahai in his defence, DW 1 Radhey Shyam has stated that one eye of the accused was defective and he had seen Jagdish putting something in the pocket of the accused silently. The accused was working at that time by bending his head. Jagdish then took a turn and the witness also went away after having some talk with the accused. He had gone to the accused to ask as to how much process fee he was to pay in a case of injunction. After about 10 or 12 minutes he heard that Ram Lal (accused) had been caught. In cross-examination ha stated that he knew Jagdish from before. At that time he had no doubt that Jagdish had put anything in the pocket of Ram Lal. He did not inform the accused that Jagdish had put anything in his pocket. He further stated that even after the accused had been caught, he did not go and meet the accused. He did not inform even the raiding party that Jagdish had tried to put anything in the pocket of the accused.

(3.) DW 2 Babu Sahai has only proved Ex. D 4, the attendance register of May, 1973 and Ex. D5 the daily case list register of the court.