NATHU LAL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal under section 374(2) Cr.PC. is directed against the judgment and order dated 22.12.82 whereby the learned Special Judge, Anti-Corruption Cases. Jaipur Rajasthan held the appellant guilty of offences under section 161 Penal Code and Under section 5(1 )(d) r.w. 5(2) of the Anti Corruption Act, 1947 (for short 'the Act') convicted him therefor and sentenced him to one year R.l. and fine of Rs. 300.00 for each of the said offences.

(2.) Briefly stated the relevant facts are that on Sept. 19, 1979 PW/2 Ram Nath, a consumer of electric energy at village LABANA under Police Station Chandwaji, Distt. Jaipur, reported to PW/12 Sawai Singh, the Dy.S.P Anti-Corruption wing of the Police Department in Rajasthan, that the appellant, who had then been working as a lineman at Chandwaji in the Rajasthan State Electricity Board (RSEB), was demanding Rupees 100.00 as bribe for replacing the electric meter at his tube-well which was burnt, like 10-12 others, due to some fault in the electric-energy supplying line. A trap was proposed to be laid on the appellant to catch him red-handed. The Dy.S.P therefore called PW/3 Mahendra Singh and PW/4 Mansingh, Lower Division Clerks in the Niyojan Vibhag and applied Phenolphthalein power on five currency notes of Rs. 10.00 each and one of Rs. 50.00. The currency notes had been given to the Dy.S.P by Ram Nath and their distinguishing numbers had also been noted down by the Dy.S.P separately. He had initiated them as well, Ram Nath was asked to deliver those currency notes to the appellant and after having done that to comb his hair which act of his was to convey message to the Dy.S.P that bribe had been accepted by the appellant. The two witnesses, named above, were directed to remain present near about the place where Ramnath was to deliver the currency notes to the appellant and listen to the talks exchanged between them and see the transaction of the delivery of the currency notes from Ram Nath to the appellant. Ram Nath's cousin, PW/8 Prabhati was to play the role of the shadow witness. The Dy.S.P then took Ram Nath, Mahendra Singh, Man Singh, named above, PW/9 Ishad Head Constable and some other policemen with him and reached Labana, where Prabhati told them that the appellant had gone to Achrol. The raiding party left for Achrol. The vehicle was stopped at the new Bus Stop and Ram Nath and the witness went to the Old Bus stand in the town. The appellant was there. During the meanwhile the police party headed by the Dy.S.P also reached there leaving the jeep behind. Ram Nath told the appellant that he had brought the demanded money. The appellant and Ramnath then went behind a Piyao where Ram Nath gave the currency notes to him and then-go-bed his hair, Prabhati and the other two witnesses had listened the talks between the appellant and Ramnath and had witnessed the passing of the currency notes from the hands of Ram Nath to the appellant. The appellant had kept the currency notes in his pocket. On noticing the signal, given by Ram Nath, the raiding party rushed to the place and caught hold of the appellant. On being questioned about taking bribe of Rs. 100.00 by him from Ram Nath the appellant stated that he had taken no bribe at all but had received Rs. 200.00 from him to be deposited with the Deptt. for replacing the burnt metre and that Rs. 221/- were required for work but Ram Nath had promised to give the balance of Rs. 21/- later on. Any way, both the hands of the appellant were got washed in four separate glasses, full of water. Water turned pinkish in colour of two but only dusty in the remaining two. In all Rs. 100.00 plus Rs. 166/-, all the currency notes, were recovered from the packet of the appellant. The number of the currency notes of Rs. 100.00 recovered from the pocket of the appellant tallied with those already noted by the Dy.S.P. The pocket of the shirt was also got washed. That too gave pinkish colour. The water was filled in bottles and those and the shirt were seized and sealed in presence of the witnesses. The learned trial Judge had accepted this version as also the evidence in support of such version. He decided the defence version as improbable.

(3.) Mr. A.K. Gupta, the learned counsel for the appellant urged that the learned trial Judge has not appreciated either the prosecution evidence or the defence evidence in right perspective. The learned counsel submitted that not only that the decoy and shadow witnesses were not reliable and other witnesses had not supported the demand of bribe by the appellant from Ram Nath but also the spontaneity in the statement made by the appellant at the time of the incident, his normal and natural conduct of not trying his arrest or resisting the same, recovery of more than Rs. 200.00 currency notes from his pocket and the testimony of the independent witnesses, Mahendra Singh and Man Singh, and other namely PW/5 Ladoo, PW/6 Kajod, PW/7 Bhagwan Sahai besides that of the defence witnesses Tara Chand and Kalyan made the defence theory highly probable and fully rebutted the presumption creates under section 4 of the Act. Mr. Gupta thus submitted that at any rate the appellant was entitled to the benefit of doubt. The learned Public Prosecutor however supported the impugned judgment and order and further submitted that since the guilty currency notes were recovered from the possession of the appellant and Ram Nath and his brother Prabhati are seen to be having any ill-will or grudge against the appellant there were no cogent reasons to discard their sworn testimonies.