GAJANAND Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment dated 18th and 19th July, 1980, passed by the Special Judge, ACD Cases Jaipur, by which the appellant was found guilty of offence under Section 5(1)(d)(2) read with Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 (for short, 'the Act') and sentenced to 1 year's rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs 1,000/ -; in default of payment of fine, to further undergo 6 month's simple imprisonment; and under Section 161, IPC to 6 month's rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 500/ -, and in default thereof to undergo 3 month's simple imprisonment. Both the sentences were, how ever, ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) TARACHAND Jain submitted a report on 14th October, 1977 before the SP, ACD, Jaipur alleging that he was working in the Roadways Department. He had to take a copy of the order of temporary injunction, in the case order of temporary injunction in the case of Tarachand v. Kalu Ram which was pending in the court of AMJM No. 1. Jaipur City, Jaipur. He had submitted an application for copy on 31st August, 1977. There, one clerk Gajanand demanded Rs. 10/ - as bribe, for the copy. He had been 2 -3 times to that court and requested Gajanand to give him the copy, but, he continued demanding Rs 10/ - as bribe. On 12th October, 1977 when he met the clerk, was told by him that unless he gave him Rs 10/ -, he would not get the copy. As the informant wanted to get Gajanand trapped he produced a currency -note Rs. 10/ -, along with the report. Manphool Singh Poonia, Additional SP, ACD, arranged for a trap and the trap -party reached the court. Then, as directed by ASP, Tarachand paid Rs 10/ - as bribe to accused Gajanand; and upon receiving a signal, the ASP accosted the accused while coming out of the room of Copying -section. The money was recovered from the pocket of his pant. After registering a case and completing usual investigation, a challan was filed against the appellant under Section 5(l)(d)(2) read with Section 5(2) of the Act.

(3.) AFTER the trial, the Special Judge who was conducting the trial found the accused guilty of the offences for which he was charge -sheeted, and sentenced him as mentioned above.