ASHOK KUMAR TULAL Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND (CBI)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant has challenged the order of conviction and sentence dated 24.12.1999 passed by Sri P.K. Sinha, 1st Additional Judicial Commissioner cum Special Judge (CBI), Ranchi in RC Case No. 9 of 1992 (R) whereby the appellant was convicted for an offence under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and also for offences under Section 13(2) and 13(i)(d) of the said Act and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years besides payment of fine of rupees two thousand.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated, the prosecution case is that the appellant at the relevant time was employed as an Assistant in Ranchi Branch No. II of the National Insurance Company Limited. Raghunath Singh (PW 6) had submitted his motor insurance claim for compensation in respect of his truck which had suffered accident on 22.3.1990. The appellant was required to process the claim application. The claim remained pending for more that two years and no amount was paid to the complainant despite the fact that the surveyor appointed by the insurance company had conducted survey and submitted his report recommending payment of compensation. After about two years, the complainant received a letter dated 20.2.1992 (Ext. A) from the Branch Manager requiring the complainant to submit weight challan in respect of the goods which were loaded on the truck at the time of the accident. The complainant submitted his reply on the following day stating that the entire documents which were in truck at the time of the accident, were lost. However, compensation was fixed and sanctioned after some deduction towards non -submission of the weight challan and the file was sent back to the appellant. It was then that the appellant had demanded illegal gratification of rupees two thousand from the complainant. Not willing to accede to the demand, the complainant filed a written complaint (Ext. 2) to the Superintendent of Police (CBI), Ranchi on 22.4.1992. The complaint was referred to PW 7, Inspector (CBI) to conduct a verification for ascertaining the truth of the complainant. PW 7 submitted his verification report (Ext. 8) regarding his finding that the allegation appeared to be correct whereupon, on the instruction of the Superintendent of Police (CBI), the case was registered against the appellant vide FIR (Ext. 9) for offences under Sections 7, 13(2) and 13(i)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. On taking up the investigation entrusted to PW 7, he prepared an elaborate plan to lay a trap. A team was constituted comprising of PW 7, two other inspectors; and a head constable of the CBI and two independent witnesses (PWs 3 and 5) who were also called to the office of the Superintendent of Police (CBI), to witness the rehearsal. The procedure for laying the trap and use of chemical powder was explained to the members of the team by practical demonstration. A sum of rupees two thousand by way of twenty currency notes each of 100 denomination, was deposited by the complainant. The numbers of the currency notes were noted down in the pre -trap memorandum (Ext. 4) and the currency notes were smeared with phenolphthalein powder and were handed over to the complainant (PW 6) for the purpose of giving it to the appellant if he demanded the money. According to the arranged plan, the complainant accompanied by two witnesses (PWs 3 and 5) went to the office of the accused. While the complainant along with PW 3 approached the appellant at his office, the other witnesses positioned themselves within close proximity to see and overhear the conversation between the complainant and the appellant. After obtaining signatures of the complainant on payment voucher at that time, the appellant demanded money in response to which, the complainant (PW 6) brought out the chemically tainted currency notes and handed over the same to the appellant who, after receiving the same by his right hand, opened the drawer of his table and kept the currency notes in it. This was seen and witnessed by PWs 3 and 5. On being signaled by the complainant, the other members of the trap party closed upon the appellant and the currency notes found in the drawer of the appellant were taken out by PW 3. A solution of sodium carbonate was prepared in which the right hand and fingers of the appellant was dipped and on Finding that the solution turned pink, the solution was sealed and preserved in the presence of the independent witnesses. On comparing the number of the seized currency notes with the numbers earlier noted in the pre -trap memorandum (Ext. 4), PWs 3 and 5 found the same to be tallying. The notes were kept thereafter in an envelope and sealed and signed by the witnesses. After preparation of the recovery memo, the sodium carbonate solution was forwarded to the CFSL for chemical analysis. The report obtained from the CFSL confirmed that the solution contained phenolphthalein and sodium carbonate. Sanction for prosecution of the appellant was obtained vide Ext. 1.

(3.) THE learned trial Court placed reliance on the evidence of the complainant as also that of the witnesses to the recovery of the tainted notes from the possession of the appellant and that of the Investigating Officer and recorded its findings of guilt against the appellant for the aforesaid offence and accordingly convicted him.