- (1.)This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 16.1.1997 passed by Special Judge, Raipur, in Special Case No. 02/1992 convicting the accused/Appellant for the offences punishable under Sections 7 and 13 (1) (d) read with 13 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year with fine of Rs. 1000, in default of payment of fine to further undergo simple imprisonment for three months, on each count.
(2.)Case of the prosecution in brief is that at the relevant time the accused/Appellant was working as Labour Inspector posted at Bilaspur bus stand. His work was to check the illegal trafficking of labourers. It is alleged that on 15.1.1988, the accused/Appellant had demanded Rs. 500 from complainant Suresh Prasad Tiwari (PW-4) who at the relevant time was looking after the work of Pratap Travels. According to the case of the prosecution, as the complainant was not interested to give the amount of Rs. 500 to the accused/Appellant, he made a written complaint Ex. P-2 in the office of Dy. Superintendent of Police (Lokayukta) Bilaspur. his preliminary statement was recorded and after calling the food inspector the trap party was constituted. Demonstration of test to be conducted was made to the trap party and subsequently pre trap panchnama (Ex. P-4) was prepared, the trap parly so constituted proceeded to the spot and thereafter the complainant gave Rs. 500 to the accused/Appellant and then signaled to the trap party regarding the same. Thereafter the trap party went there and trapped the accused/Appellant. Subsequently panchnama Ex. P-5 was prepared and vide Ex. P-6 currency notes were seized. Further case of the prosecution is that after seeing the trap party, accused/Appellant threw the said amount of Rs. 500 on the floor which subsequently was collected by the trap party. Hands of the accused were washed in the sodium carbonate solution which according to the FSL report Ex. P-l 7 proved positive as its colour had turned light pink. Sanction to prosecute the accused/Appellant was obtained on 4.10.1991 vide Ex. P-18 and then after investigation the challan was filed on 20.2.1992 for the offences under Sections 161 IPC and 5 (1) (d) and 5 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act but the trial Court had framed the charges under Sections 7 and 13(1 )(d) read with 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act.
(3.)So as to hold the accused/Appellant guilty, prosecution has examined 13 witnesses in support of its case. Statement of the accused/Appellant was also recorded under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in which he denied the charges levelled against him and pleaded his innocence and false implication in the case.