DIWESH NARAYAN RAIZADA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both these appeals, arising from separate judgments and orders dated 8th May, 1997 and 15th May, 1997, are directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed in R.C.Case Nos. 16/85(D) and 17/85(D), whereby and whereunder the learned Special Judge CBI, Dhanbad held the appellant guilty under Section 161 IPC and Section 5(2)(d) read with Section 5(i)(d) of the P.C. Act and sentenced him to undergo RI for one year under Section 161, IPC and one year under Section 5(i)(d) read with Section 5(2) (d) of the P.C. Act, however, both the sentences were directed to run concurrently in each case.

(2.) The factual matrix giving occasion for these appeals are as follows: Cr. Appeal No. 94 of 1997: The appellant was serving in Jealgora Central Hospital of BCCL as Medical Superintendent on the fateful day of 5th September, 1985. According to the prosecution, one Badlu Harijan, a miner loader of Bhulan Barari Colliery of BCCL Area No.XI, has overstayed on leave in July, 1985 and when he reported back on duty, he was not allowed to resume the duty and asked to procure a fitness certificate required to be counter-signed by the Medical Superintendent, Jealgora Central Hospital. Badlu Harijan requested the appellant on 3-9-85 to counter-sign the fitness certificate, on which appellant demanded Rs. 100/- and asked him to come again on 4th September, 1985. Said Badlu Harijan approached SP, CBI, Dhanbad and filed a complaint before him alleging therein that the appellant was demanding illegal money for countersign in the medical fitness certificate, vide Ext.6. The CBI office, Dhanbad decided to lay a trap on the appellant. Accordingly a trap team was constituted including PW 2, Kali Shankar Singh and one Uday Shankar Mishra, independent witness, as well as CBI personnel Lakhi Prasad, A. K. Asthana, Ekka Bahadur etc. The raid was led by R. C. Choudhary, Inspector CBI, Dhabad. The trap team constituting all the witnesses was called for briefing on 4th September, 1985 in the office of the SP CBI, Dhanbad, where, as required under law, briefing was made showing how trap could be laid, using phenolphthalein powder on a piece of paper and currency notes and then washing the hands showing that how tainted finger would result in colouring of the wash by preserving it in a bottle and sealing it in presence of the witnesses. Thereafter, the raiding party reached the Central Hospital, Jealgora on 4th September, 1985 in the afternoon. However, the appellant did not turn up in his office and the team has to return back without any success.

(3.) It is further asserted by the prosecution that on the next day the trap was again laid in which Uday Shankar Mishra could not be available. Therefore, another independent witness Sohrai Dodrai was included in the alleged team and the team again rehearsed the trap on 5.9.85, reached the Jealgora Central Hospital in the forenoon and waited for the appellant to come to his office till afternoon. According to the prosecution case, when Dr. Raizada reached his office, he was being waited by the complainant Badlu Harijan and Mangru Sonar, complainant in another R.C.Case No. 17/85(D) along with the compounder of the doctor According to the witnesses, the appellant demanded Rs.100/- from Badlu Harijan before countersigning the fitness certificate Badlu Harijan gave Rs. 100/- in two currency notes of Rs.50/- treated with phenolphthalein to the appellant and after obtaining his fitness certificate, he came out of the room Immediately thereafter the CBI team constituted earlier entered in the office of the appellant and confronted him with the allegation that he has demanded and acceptec Rs. 100/- illegally for countersigning the fitness certificate. The raiding party further recovered Rs.100/- currency notes from papers kept at the table of the appellant, following the procedure and getting the hands of the appellant washed, preserving the residues in two bottles, getting it sealed and signed by witnesses and the accused as well as the currency notes secured in an envelop having obtained the signatures of the witnesses and the appellant. The memorandum of raid was also prepared. According to the prosecution, all formalities required under the rules were performed and the appellant was arrested, who denied the allegations.