- (1.) UNDER consideration in the instant appeal is the sustainability of the judgment and order dated 25.10.2007 passed by the Special Judge Anti Corruption (West) Lucknow in Criminal Case No. 16 of 2000 arising out of R.C. No. 29 (A)/99 whereby the appellant was convicted for the offence under Section 7 and 13 (2) read with Section 13 (1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. For the offence under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, the appellant was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and also with fine of Rs. 1,000/ - with default stipulation of one month additional imprisonment. For the offence under Section 13 (2) read with Section 13 (1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, he was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of five years and also with fine of Rs. 5,000/ - with default stipulation of six months additional imprisonment.
(2.) IN brief, the facts necessary for the instant appeal may be summed up as under: - The appellant was alleged to be working as Ziledar in the office of District Opium Officer, Barabanki. On 26.11.1999, complainant Kaushal Kishore gave a written complaint to S.P., C.B.I., Lucknow that he had applied for the license to cultivate opium in the office of District Opium Officer, Barabanki and the fee was deposited on 12.11.1999 but inspite of that the complainant did not get the license. On 25.11.1999, the complainant met the appellant then he demanded Rs. 2,500/ - and told him that only after payment of the said money his license shall be issued. Since the complainant was not willing to give bribe, therefore, he made this complaint. Thereafter all the necessary formalities for laying trap were completed on same day. The complainant, with shadow witness Samuel Singh, gave an indication to the appellant on which he came out of his offence. The complainant got the shadow witness introduced to the appellant as his cousin. The appellant asked him have you brought the money, then the complainant gave the treated notes to the appellant. Appellant told him that your license has already been given to your brother Durga Prasad and he may take it from him. The accused after counting the notes put it in his left pocket of jeans. Thereafter on the indication of the shadow witness, other members of the trap team reached there and gave their introduction to the appellant. Thereafter money was recovered and all other necessary formalities were completed. After completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed against the appellant on 2.8.2000.
(3.) IN order to prove its case the prosecution has examined PW -1 Rameshwar Prasad Meena, who has given sanction to prosecute. PW -2 Kaushal Kishore, the complainant. PW -3 Durga Prasad, who was appointed by the department as Lambardar to do all the formalities on behalf of the farmers and to get the license and to distribute the said licenses to the farmers. He was a link between office and farmers. This witness happens to be the real brother of the complainant. PW -4 Samuel Singh, is the shadow witness. PW -5 Jayant Kashmiri, Deputy S.P., C.B.I. He was the leader of the trap team. PW -6 R.N. Dwivedi, who has conducted the investigation. On behalf of the defence three defence witnesses were produced. DW -1 Shri Dharmendra Kumar, who was working in the office of District Opium Officer and has produced certain documents, which were summoned in defence on behalf of the appellant. DW -2 Shiv Pujan Singh Yadav the then District Opium Officer, Barabanki and DW -3 Sub Inspector Smt. Shanti Manju, at the relevant time she was also posted in the office of District Opium Officer.;