RAM GOPAL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal under section 374 Crimial P.C. is directed against the judgement and order dated 26.11.82 whereby the learned Special Judge, Anti-Corruption Cases, Jaipur, in Sessions Case No. 7/79, held the appellant guilty of the offences under section 161 and under section 5(1 )(d)(ii) of the Anti-Corruption Act, 1947 (for short, 'the Act') convicted him as such and sentenced him to undergo R.l. for one year and fine of Rs. 200.00 for each of the said offences.

(2.) Relevant facts are these : During the year 1978 Ram Gopal appellant was posted as Patwari' at village Garh Tiknet in Tehsil Sri Madhopur, Distt. Sikar. PW/1 Nand Ram, an agriculturist resident within his Halqa stood in need of the copy of Khasra girdawari for four years in respect of Khasra No. 650, which was though recorded as 'Charagah' in Revenue record yet was in possession of the said agriculturist. Nand Ram. therefore, sent his nephew PW/3 Nag Ram to obtain the required copy. Nagram allegedly moved the requisite application for copy of the desired document before the appellant but the appellant allegedly demanded a bribe of Rs. 100.00 from him to issuing the copy. Nag Ram informed Nand Ram of the demand of the appellant. Nand Ram contacted the appellant for two or three times. The appellant repeated his demand for bribe. Nand Ram and Nag Ram contacted PW/12 Virendra Kumar, Dy.S.P Anti-Corruption Deptt. on 17.8.78. The Dy.S.P proposed to lays trap on 18.8.78, Nag Ram and one Phoola Ram were made Motabirs. Five currency notes of Rs. 10.00 each and one currency note of Rs. 50.00 on which Phenolphthalien had been duly applied in presence of the Motabirs were given to Nand Ram and he was directed to give them to the appellant. The Motabirs were directed to witness the delivery of the currency notes by Nand Ram to the appellant and also to hear the talks which takes place between them. Nand Ram was directed to take off his turban after the delivery of the currency notes to the appellant as a sigh of his having done so. The Dy.S.P and his subordinate stationed themselves near the Patwari Ghar at village Garh Tiknet. Nand Ram did as he was directed to do. The appellant after receiving the Phenolphthalienated currency notes of Rs. 100.00 kept them in the lower drawer of his almirah and issued the desired copy of the revenue record to Nand Ram. On Nand Ram's signal PW/12 Virendra Singh Dy.S.P, PW/6 Dhashrathmal, PW/10 Roop Singh PW/11 Kesar Singh reached the Patwarghar which was in the room in the village Dharamshala. The Dy.S.P asked the appellant whether he had received Rs. 100.00 as bribe from Nand Ram. The appellant stated that he had received Rs. 33.10 from Nand Ram and some amount from Nagram towards the amount of penalty which was due from them. The Dy.S.P then took a glass-full of water, added some quantity of Sodium Carbonate to the water, PW/2 Nanag Ram, who was present there, was asked to wash his fingers in that solution but on his doing so the water did not change its colour. Then the appellant was asked to dip his fingers in the solution. On his doing that the water in the glass became pinkish in colour. The appellant was then asked to present the currency notes before the Dy.S.P The appellant took then out from the drawer of his Almira and handed over the. same to the Dy.S.P. The Dy.S.P seized and sealed the sodium carbonated water and the currency notes separately in presence of the witness. On chemical examination the Public Analyst of the State Central Public Health Laboratory Rajasthan, Jaipur, detected Sodium Carbonate and Phenolphthalein in the solution sent by the Dy.S P. to him. After obtaining the requisite sanction for the proposition from the Collector, PW/13. P. Pramesh Chandra, the police report was submitted and on trial the learned Special Judge held the appellant guilty of the offences under section 161 Penal Code and under section 5(1 )(d)(ii) of Act of 1947.

(3.) Mr. A.K. Gupta, the learned counsel for the appellant, urged that in holding the appellant guilty of the offences under section 161 Penal Code and under section 5(1 )(d)(ii) of Act of 1947 the truth in the defence plea has been wrongly rejected by the learned trial Judge. It was pointed out by the learned counsel that PW/1 Nand Ram and his nephew, who both were the star witnesses in the case, were inimical towards the appellant from before the alleged incident and the appellant under the orders of his superior authorities had proceeded against them for their having taken unlawful possession of the Charagah land and had imposed penalties upon them and was presenting hard for realising such penalties from them. Mr. Gupta led me through the evidence available on the record of the lower court and highlighted the fact that both the star witnesses had been declared hostile by the prosecution and that their testimony did not establish the case of the prosecution against the appellant. It was submitted that the appellant had received the amount of Rs. 100.00 from the witness towards the penalty and other dues, due from them and his spontaneous and consistent version should have been given due weight.