Ratnavel Pandian, J. - (1.) This appeal by Special Leave granted under Art. 136 of the Constitution of India is preferred against the correctness of the Judgment dated 12th Sept. 1983 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana dismissing the Criminal Appeal preferred by the appellant, Kewal Krishan challenging the Judgment of the Special Judge, Ferozepur in Corruption Case No. 6 of 1982 convicting the appellant under S. 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and under S. 161 of the Penal Code and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years and pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- for the conviction under each of the charges with the direction that in default of payment of fine in each case, the appellant should suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year and with a further direction that the substantive sentences of imprisonment imposed under both the charges are to run concurrently.
(2.) The prosecution version in brief is as follows:- The appellant was a Head Constable attached to the Police Station, Ferozepur Cantt. On 23-11-1981 at about 7.30 p.m. while this appellant and his co-accused, namely, Gurcharan Singh, Inder Singh and Gurdev Singh (who were arrayed as accused Nos. 2 to 4 and acquitted by the trial Court) were on patrol duty, they intercepted a tempo driven by PW-9 and found the tempo being loaded with 8 tubes containing illicit liquor. PW-7 who is said to be the owner of the contraband was in the tempo. The appellant demanded a sum of Rs. 3000/- as illegal gratification stating that in failure of the payment of the amount. PW-7 would be taken to the CIA staff. Ultimately a bargain was struck at Rs. 2500/ PW-7 accompanied by the appellant went to his house, got a sum of Rs. 1200/- from his wife (PW-10) who in turn got that amount from her neighbour on pledging her jewels and gave that amount to the appellant with the promise that the balance amount of Rs. 1300/- would be paid on the following day. Besides this amount, it is stated that the appellant took three tubes of illicit liquor from the tempo and obtained thumb impression of PW-7 on some blank papers and threatened that in case PW-7 failed to comply with his promise of payment of the balance amount, these papers would be used as recovery memos. The appellant paid a sum of Rs. 225/- to each of the Constables and retained the major portion of Rs. 525/-. This led to a quarrel between the appellant and Constable Gurcharan Singh during the course of which Gurcharan Singh was assaulted by the appellant. On 25-11-1981, Gurcharan Singh gave a written complaint to the A.S.P. under Exhibit PH. The A.S.P. directed an investigation of this complaint by the Inspector of Police (PW-11). After the investigation, PW-11 filed the charge-sheet against this appellant and the other three Constables. The prosecution examined PW-1 to PW-12 and on the side of the defence DW-1 and DW-2 were examined. The case of the appellant and the other accused was one of total denial. The trial Court even before assessing the evidence recorded a finding in paragraph 4 of its judgment with regard to the case of A-2 to A-4, the relevant portion of which reads thus:- "..........there is no evidence incriminating particularly Gurdev Singh and Inder Singh accused. Against Gurcharan Singh also only very brief reference appears in the evidence and for obvious reasons, he has also to be let off."
(3.) After making the observation with regard to A-2 to A-4 as above, the trial Court found A-1 guilty and convicted and sentenced him as stated above. The State has not preferred any appeal against acquittal of A-2 to A-4. The convicted appellant (Kewal Krishan) preferred an appeal before the High Court which dismissed the appeal, in our view, in a very summary manner observing as follows:- "The evidence of this witness looks very natural and truthful. I am of the considered view that the evidence of this witness has been rightly relied upon. His statement is corroborated by the statement of his wife Agya Rani (PW-10) who arranged for the money to be paid to the appellant. The recovery of the tube of illicit liquor from the appellant lends further assurance to the prosecution case. The conviction recorded by the learned Special Judge is well merited.";