K H BHATTACHARJEE Vs. EMPEROR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The two petitioners were tried by the Additional Chief Presidency Magistrate of Calcutta and were convicted of the offence of bribery. Petitioner 1, K. H. Bhattacharjee was sentenced under Section 161, Indian Penal Code, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months. Petitioner 2, Amar Bhattacharjee alias Mantu was sentenced under Section 161/109, Indian Penal Code, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months. The two rules have been issued to show cause why the convictions and the sentences should not be set aside. The case for the prosecution briefly is that petitioner, 1 K. H. Bhattacharjee was the personal assistant to the Controller of Inspection, Indian Stores Department, Calcutta Circle, and petitioner 2, Amar Bhattacharjee was a typist in the same office. The complainant Kunja Behary Ghose applied for an appointment in the office of the Indian Stores Department. He was directed to appear for a test and did so. A week after appearing for the test, this witness Kunja Behary Ghose visited the office to ascertain the result. Petitioner 1 then told him that he would get the information later. About a month later, probably some time in August 1942, Kunja Behary Ghose again saw petitioner 1 to ascertain what was his fate. On this occasion, petitioner 1 showed him two fingers, and explained that he would have to pay two hundred rupees. Kunja Behary Ghose stated that he could not pay so much, and he was directed to go to the village home of petitioner 1, on the following Sunday. Kunja Behary Ghose accordingly visited the village home of petitioner 1 on the following Sunday. He there met petitioner 2, Amar whom he had previously seen in the office. Amar represented himself to be the nephew of petitioner 1. Kunja Behary Ghose was told that petitioner 1 was upstairs. He waited for some time, and saw other people going upstairs apparently to interview petitioner 1. He accordingly spoke to Amar, petitioner 2 and requested, him to take him to petitioner 1. Amar did so and on the way upstairs explained to Kunja Behary that he would have to pay the sum of two hundred rupees. Kunja Behary saw petitioner 1 upstairs. Again, he was told by petitioner 1 that he would have to pay two hundred rupees for the job. Ultimately, it was agreed that he should pay one hundred and fifty rupees.

(2.) On 21 September 1942, Kunja Behary Ghose again went to the office and saw petitioner 1. He was asked if he had the money with him and he replied that he had not He was told that he would get the appointment if he produced the money. On the following day, namely, 22nd September 1942, Kunja Behary called at the office with fifty rupees which he had borrowed from one Jiten Ghose who works in the General Electric Company. The fifty rupees were paid to petitioner 2 to be made over to petitioner 1. On that day, Kunja Behary Ghose was given his letter of appointment, and he wrote his joining letter. On a subsequent occasion, Kunja Behary made a second payment of fifty rupees to Amar, petitioner 2 in the presence of petitioner 1, and the money was handed over by the second to petitioner 1. On 6 or 7th October 1942, Kunja Behary was given to understand that if he did not pay the balance of fifty rupees, petitioner 1 would procure his dismissal. Being unable to find the money, Kunja Behary again went to Jiten Ghose at General Electric Company's office, and tried to obtain the money. He told all the circumstances to Jiten Ghose, and the matter was reported to two officers of the General Electric Company. He was advised to inform the police, Kunja Behary then got in touch with Mr. K. N. Mukherjee, Deputy Superintendent of Police, who had been placed on special duty to investigate cases of bribery. He told the whole story to Mr. K. N. Mukherjee who told him that he would provide him with fifty rupees which he should pay next morning to petitioner 1. In the meantime, Mr. K. N. Mukherjee moved the Chief Presidency Magistrate to provide him with a Magistrate who would be present when the payment was made and to note markings on five ten-rupee notes which would be made over to the recipient of the bribe.

(3.) Accordingly, on the following day, Kunja Behary was sent to the office, and Mr. Mukherjee and the Magistrate and another gentleman sat in the outer office. Kunja Behary went into the inner office, handed over the sum of fifty rupees in marked notes, then came out and made a signal that he had made the payment. The police officer, the Magistrate and the witness then hurried into the room and found the marked notes in the possession of petitioner 1. Petitioner 1 there and then made a statement to the effect that Kunja Behary had come to him and said that he owed money to Amar and that he was not able to wait to find Amar, and he had asked petitioner 1 to take this money and make it over to Amar on his behalf. Ten prosecution witnesses were examined. No witnesses were examined for the defence. It is not denied that Kunja Behary was an applicant for a post in the Stores Department in July 1942. It is not denied that he received an appointment in September 1942. It is not denied that he entered the room of petitioner 1 on the date of occurrence, and handed over the sum of fifty rupees in marked notes to petitioner 1. The defence does, however, deny that any money was demanded from Kunja Behary as a reward for getting him the job. The defence does deny that any pressure was put on Kunja Behary to make payment after he succeeded in getting the job. The defence does deny that any money was paid to K. H. Bhattacharjee or Amar either on 22 September, or on 6 October 1942, and denies that fifty rupees were paid to K. H. Bhattacharjee on the day of occurrence as a bribe or as a reward for securing the appointment for Kunja Behary. The learned Magistrate examined the evidence with care and came to the conclusion that the case had been proved satisfactorily, and he convicted both the accused persons. Revision Case No. 754 of 1943.