BINOD KUMAR PANDIT Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CHALLENGE in this appeal is against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 17.3.2008 passed by the 7th Additional Judicial Commissioner -cum -Special Judge, CBI, Ranchi in R.C. Case No. 14(A) of 2002(R), whereby the appellant was convicted for the offence under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act read with Sections 13(2) and 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and sentenced to imprisonment for two years for the offence under Section 7 and three years for the offence under Section 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act besides payment of total amount of fine of Rs. 5,000/-.

(2.) FACTS of the case in brief is that the complainant who was employed as Postman in Sub Post Office, Namkum, had applied for his transfer on 12.9.2002 on account of his personal inconveniences at his present place of posting. Earlier', on 11.9.2002 he had gone on earned leave. When he returned and wanted to resume his duty on 1.10.2002, the appellant who was then posted as Postal Assistant and his colleague S.N. Swansi, Sub -Postmaster, refused him to join duty and instead, they demanded illegal gratification of Rs. 5,000/ - not only to allow him to join his duty, but also to recommend for his transfer. Unwilling to pay the bribe money, the complainant lodged a complaint before the Superintendent of Post Office on 29.11.2002 with a copy thereof to the Director -il'1 -Chief, P.M.G., Bihar through registered post. On 1.11.2002 the Postmanl complainant met the accused persons at the Namkum Post Office who again repeated their alleged demand for illegal gratification of at least a sum of Rs. 900/ -as initial payment and the rest after he received his salary. Thereafter, the complainant approached the Superintendent of Police, CBI by filing a complaint. On receipt of the complaint, a preliminary inquiry was conducted by the Inspector, CBI. On the basis of the verification report filed by the Inspector, a case was registered against the appellant and, Inspector Vikash Gupta was entrusted with the investigation. After the FIR was registered for the aforesaid offences vide R.C. Case No. 14(A) of 2002(R) on 2.11.2002 against both the accused persons. In course of investigation, the investigating officer chalked out a plan to trap both the accused persons red -handed. A trap team was constituted under the direction of D.I.G. Police, CBI, Ranchi comprising investigating officer and two other Inspectors of Police besides one Sub -Inspector and two constables. Two independent witnesses namely, Umesh 'Kumar Tripathy, Dy. Manager, Vigilance, C.C.L., Ranchi and Sri Sachidanand Prasad Sinha, S.E., Vigilance, C.C.L., Ranchi were also requisitioned through their controlling authority. Rehearsal of the plan for laying the trap was made in presence of the complainant and both the independent witnesses were acquainted with the nature of the complaint of the complainant, which was also affirmed by the complainant before them. Thereafter, the team proceeded along with the complainant and the independent witnesses to Namkum Post Office at about 1.00 P.M. on 2.11.2002. After studying typography of the area, members of the trap party positioned themselves at strategic points. As per plan, the complainant entered the Post Office and from a distance he identified both the accused persons to the witnesses. Thereafter, he approached the appellant Binod Kumar Pandit followed by the independent witness Umesh Kumar Tripathy. The complainant greeted the appellant and in response, the appellant asked as to whether the complainant had brought the money to which, the complainant replied in the affirmative. The appellant called the complainant towards the exit door and also called his colleague James Kulu to come towards the exit door. The appellant instructed the complainant to handover the money to his colleague James Kulu. Upon this, James Kulu stretched out his hand to receive the money from the complainant and in response, the complainant brought out the currency notes, which were earlier tainted with phenolphthalein powder, from his shirt pocket and placed the money on the extended right hand of James Kulu who after receiving the currency notes, counted the money with both his hands and kept the currency notes in his trouser pocket. On the money being handed over, the appellant cautioned the complainant not to reveal this to anybody. The entire conversation was allegedly over heard by the shadow witness Umesh Kumar Tripathy and the handing over of money by the complainant was seen by other witnesses namely, K.K. Singh and Mahesh Kumar who were standing nearby at vantage points. On receipt of signal from the complainant, members of the trap team alongwith other independent witness namely Sachidanand Prasad Sinha, rushed immediately to the accused Binod Kumar Pandit and his colleague James Kulu. Inspector Vikas Gupta after disclosing his identity challenged both of them for having demanded and accepted bribe money of Rs. 900/ -. The appellant admitted his guilt by stating that he has committed mistake. On the instruction of the Inspector, his colleague K.K. Singh caught hold of the hand and wrist of James Kulu. Both the accused persons were arrested. Chemical test was conducted by dipping the hands and trouser pocket of James Kulu. On being asked, James Kulu brought upon the tainted currency notes from his right side pocket of his trouser and handed over the same to the witness Umesh Kumar Tripathy who on being asked, counted and compared the same with the denomination of the currency notes with the denomination noted in the pre -trap memorandum and confirmed that the denomination of the currency notes seized, tallied with the denomination noted down in the pre -trap memorandum. The seized currency notes were thereafter kept in an envelope, which was sealed and signed by the members of the trap team. A recovery memorandum was prepared at the spot and signed by all the witnesses and a copy thereof was given to both the accused persons who appended their respective signatures in acknowledgment of receipt of the copy. The seized materials were thereafter forwarded to the C.S.F.L., Ranchi for examination. After obtaining report, sanction for prosecuting both the accused persons was obtained from the competent authority. After conclusion of the investigation, charge -sheet was submitted against both the accused persons recommending their trial. However, since James Kulu has been tendered his pardon, he was pardoned under Section 306 of the Cr.P.C. and trial proceeded only against the present appellant namely, Binod Kumar Pandit. The appellant denied charges and had pleaded in his defence that he was falsely implicated by the complainant on account of the fact that he had reported against the drunken behaviour and conduct of the complainant to Senior Officer of the Postal Department and the complainant had threatened him to implicate him in false cases. Altogether twelve witnesses were examined by the prosecution at the trial including the independent witnesses and the members of the trap team and the investigating officer and James Kulu. In addition to the oral evidence of the witnesses, prosecution had adduced the complaint as filed by the complainant, order of sanction for prosecution of the accused persons, leave application which the complainant had filed, the complaint submitted by the complainant to the Superintendent of Post Office, transfer petition which the complainant had submitted to his superior in office, attendance register, formal FIR and the pre -trap and post -trap memorandum.

(3.) ON the basis of the evidence of the witnesses, the trial court recorded its findings that the accused Vinod Kumar Pandit had demanded and received a sum of Rs. 900/ - by way of illegal gratification from the complainant for the purposes of allowing the complainant to resume his duty as well as to recommend for his transfer. On the basis of such findings, the learned trial court convicted the appellant for the offences mentioned above.