STATE OF JHARKHAND Vs. MADAN MOHAN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The State of Jharkhand, through Superintendent of Police, C.B.I., Dhanbad has filed this appeal against the judgment dated 29.11.2000 passed by Special Judge, C.B.I., Dhanbad in R.C. Case No. 11(A) of 91(D) whereby the Special Court has acquitted the sole accused Respondent, namely Madan Mohan Singh from the charges under Sections 7 and 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

(2.) Prosecution case, in short, is that the complainant L.B.P. Shrivastav, Contractor of BCCL lodged a written complaint dated 27.06.1991 with the S.P., C.B.I., Dhanbad stating therein that the accused Respondent demanded a sum of Rs. 500/from him as illegal gratification for preparation of bills relating to the civil works done by him. Mr. R.S. Kuril, Sub Inspector of Police, C.B.I., Dhanbad verified the complaint under the order of the S.P., C.B.I., Dhanbad and on such verification, the allegation made by the complainant against the Respondent accused was found to be correct and well founded. Thereafter, on the basis of the said complaint and on the basis of the verification report the instant case was registered under Sections 7 and 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the P.C. Act, 1988 and, thereafter, investigation was taken up by one B.K. Birdi, Inspector of Police, C.B.I., Dhanbad who arranged an assembly of two independent witnesses, Mr. S.K. Choudhary, Group Clerk, Region No. 1, D.G.M.S., Dhanbad and Jagannath Roy, L.D.C., Examination Section, D.G.M.S., Dhanbad. Then the complainant was introduced to all the members. The purposes of the assembly was explained to all the members of the trap team. All the members of the C.B.I. Trap Team and both the witnesses and the complainant were introduced to each other. After following the entire Pre Trap Proceeding procedure the Pre Trap Memorandum was prepared. The contents of which were read over and explained to all the members of the team who put their signatures thereon. The independent witness, Jagannath Roy was instructed to follow the complainant as shadow witness so that he could hear the conversation between the complainant and the accused and see the transaction between the complainant and the accused. He was further advised to give a signal by stretching back portion of his neck as soon as the tainted amount was handed over by the complainant to the accused.

(3.) Further case of the prosecution is that after holding Pre Trap Proceeding the C.B.I. Raiding Party along with both the independent witnesses and the complainant went to the office of the Dy. C.M.E., E.K.O.C.P., Dhansar Colliary, BCCL, Dhanbad on the same day at about 13 hours. Thereafter, members of the raiding party took their suitable position. The complainant L.B.P. Shrivastav and the witness Jagannath Roy went to the room of the accused Respondent where he used to sit but they could not find the accused there and they came to know that the accused Respondent had already left the office for his residence at about 1520 minutes earlier. Then, it was decided to go to his residence situated at Hirapur. Accordingly, the team proceeded to the residence of the accused situated at Professors Colony, Chiragora, Hirapur, Dhanbad. On arrival there, all the members took their position by the side of the road passing by the boundary wall of the accused. As instructed, the complainant, L.B.P. Shrivastav along with shadow witness Jagannath Roy entered through the boundary gate and went upstairs where the accused was living with his family. When the accused saw the complainant at his door, he came out of his room. The complainant wished the accused and informed him that he was a little late in reaching at Dhansar K.O.C.P. Office and after ascertaining that the accused had left for his house to meet him at his residence. At that the accused asked the complainant to come inside the room. The shadow witness, Jagannath Roy too followed the complainant. Both the complainant and the shadow witness who were introduced as 'Gumasta' of the complainant, were made to sit on the wooden cot. Immediately, thereafter, the complainant requested the accused to expedite the preparation of the bills in respect of the Barbad wire fencing in the East Basuria. At this request of the complainant, the accused Madan Mohan Singh asked "500/RUPYE HUM JO AAPKO LANE KE LIYE BOLE THE, LAYE HO?": The complainant replied, JI, SIR, AAPKE KAHE MUTABIK RUPYA LE AAYE HAIN'. The accused then stretched his hand and said "LAO DE DO". On this, the complainant took out the tainted amount of Rs. 500/from the left upper chest pocket of his shirt and handed over the same to the accused who accepted the same by his right hand and after counting the bribed amount with both of his hand the accused kept the same on the cot beneath the papers relating to the agreement of the work which had been just then taken by him from the complainant. Soon after money transaction was over, the shadow witness Jagannath Roy came out of the room and gave a signal by scratching the back portion of his neck with his left hand. On receipt of the signal, the I.O. along with other witness S.K. Choudhary reached to the spot and after disclosing his identity the I.O. challenged the accused about his having demanded and accepted a sum of Rs. 500/as illegal gratification from the complainant for showing him favour in preparation of his bill. On being thus challenged, the accused became perplexed and could not offer any explanation. After a few moments, the accused however confessed to have accepted illegal gratification of Rs. 500/from the complainant. By then, all the members of raiding party had reached the spot. On being pointed out by the complainant and the shadow witness, the tainted money was recovered from beneath the paper. The numbers and denomination of the recovered tainted money were compared with that of G.C. Notes recorded in the Preliminary Memorandum prepared in the C.B.I. Office. On comparison, all of them tallied in to. Then the recovered tainted G.C. Notes were preserved in a small envelope which was sealed and signed by all the present members. Subsequent to that a solution of Sodium Carbonate with water was prepared in a glass tumbler in which the accused on being asked, dipped his right hand fingers. Consequently, milky solution became pink which was preserved in a clean glass phial which was sealed and signed by all of them. Another alike solution was also prepared in which the accused dipped his left hand finger as a result of which milky solution turned pink. That solution was also preserved in another glass phial which was also sealed and signed by all the members of raiding party. All these materials were marked as Exhibits. The accused was then put under arrest and thereafter his personal search was made by the investigation officer. Thereafter, the arrest memo was prepared separately. On search certain incriminating documents were recovered and for that seizure list was prepared separately. Thereafter the memo of recovery was prepared and all the members of raiding party put their signatures. A copy of the memorandum of recovery was handed over to the accused. After obtaining sanction order from the competent authority, the I.O. submitted charge sheet under the aforesaid Sections of the P.C. Act, 1988 against the Respondent accused. Cognizance was taken and the trial proceeded. The accused pleaded not guilty to the charges framed against him and claimed to be tried. He, in his examination under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, clearly denied the entire allegation brought against him. He very categorically stated that without doing the contract work the complainant L.B.P. Shrivastav pressurised him (accused) to prepare his favourable bill. On 22.06.1991 at about 12.30 P.M. the complainant came to him and asked him to prepare his bill. In reply thereto, the accused told him that since even less than half of the contract work had not been done by him, he would not prepare the complete bill. On that, the complainant abused him. Thereupon, it is said that the accused pushed him out of his house. Thereafter, the complainant went away from there grumbling and holding out threat that he would take revenge against the accused and spoil his life.