- (1.) Heard Sri Dilip Kumar assisted by Sri Rajrshi Gupta, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri N.K. Verma, learned A.G.A. for the State.
(2.) This Criminal Misc. Application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been moved with a prayer of quashing the impugned charge sheet no. 6 of 2017 dated 20.12.2017 and the entire proceedings of Criminal Case no. 42 of 2017 (State Vs. Neeraj Kumar Singh) pending in the court of Special Judge, Anti Corruption, Meerut, under Section 7/13 (1) D read with section 13 (2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, P.S. Mant, District- Mathura and the order taking cognizance on the said charge-sheet dated 22.12.2017.
(3.) The facts of the case are that the Opposite Party no. 2 lodged an F.I.R. being Crime No. 318 of 2017, under Section 7/13 (1) D read with 13 (2) of Prevention of Corruption Act (hereinafter referred in short as 'PC Act') on 30.10.2017 at P.S. Mant, District Mathura against the applicant stating therein that one complaint was moved by Virendra Singh son of Ramdayal, village Udiyagarhi, P.S. Nauhjhil, District Mathura, addressed to In-charge Anti-Corruption Organization, Agra stating that his wife Smt Mithlesh was working as Assistant at Aangan Bari Center, Primary School Gadhi Kolahar, Block Naujheel, Mathura, inspection of which was made by Bal Vikas Pariyojana Adhikari, Sri Neeraj Kumar Singh (applicant) on 11.10.2017 and he found various irregularities, pursuant to which a notice was issued to her on 11.10.2017, which was replied by her on 16.10.2017 for disposing of the said matter. He (applicant) demanded an amount of Rs. 10,000/- as bribe for deciding the said matter and it was decided that the said amount of bribe would be given to him at an appointed place. But the complainant, instead of given bribe, wanted to get the petitioner apprehended receiving the bribe. The said complaint was got inquired into confidentially by Mohd. Yusuf Shaikh and finding substance therein the Opposite Party No.2 sent a report on 27.10.2017 to S.P., Anti-Corruption Organization, Lucknow to constitute a trap team. After consultation, under the leader-ship of the Opposite Party No.2, a trap team was constituted comprising a H.C.P. Mohd. Yousuf Shaikh, Bahadur Singh, lady Constable Sandhya Nigam and Constable (driver) Raghvendra Singh. The said trap team was instructed by the Opposite Party No.2 to reach Mathura on 30.11.2017 and the complainant was instructed to meet the trap team at Raya-Mant road out side the gate of Dalchand Singh Mahavidyala. On 30.10.2017, the trap team reached office of D.M.'s Mathura in Jeap number UP 32 AG 1877 at 8:00 a.m., there Mohd. Israr meet them. On the application moved by Opposite Party no. 2 to D.M. Mathura requesting for two independence witnesses to be provided, Sri Dinesh Kumar Sexana JA II and Sarad Sharma TAC II of Collectorate, Mathura were nominated, with whom the trap team reached Dalchandra Singh Mahavidyala and met the complainant there. Thereafter, they reached in the meeting hall of Mahavidyala, where, the complainant reiterated / verified the allegations made in his application in front of the members of the trap team and witnesses and five note of Rs. 2000/- denomination bearing numbers mentioned in the F.I.R. which amounted to Rs. 10,000/-, after being treated, were given to the complainant with a direction that those currency notes would be given by the complainant to the accused-applicant on asking for bribe. A memo, in this regard, was prepared by the O.P. No.2, which was signed by the witnesses and the members of the trap team and thereafter, in accordance with the agreed plan, the complainant as well as all the members of the trap team reached the said Mahavidyala at 1:50 hours, where two teams were constituted of the members of the trap team. In the first team, the O.P. No. 2 himself, In-charge inspector, Head Constable Bahadur Singh and independent witness Sarad Sharma and in the other team SIM Mohd. Israr, H.C.P. Mohd. Yusuf Shaikh were included. Complainant was instructed to go along with Smt Sandhya Nigam and independent witness Dinesh Kumar Singh to the office. Both the sub-trap teams were deployed outside the gate of CDPO office. The complainant and the independent witnesses along with lady constable reached the office of CDPO where the complainant requested the CDPO to decide the reply, which was sent in response to the explanation of his wife. At this CDPO / applicant-accused demanded Rs. 10,000/- for its early disposal. Pursuant to that the complainant took out the said money and after having counted it, handed it over to the applicant, who after receiving the same started counting it, which was seen by the members of the trap team. And having been convinced of the said amount having been taken by the applicant as bribe, he was arrested at 2:20 pm and from his personal search 5 currency notes were recovered amounting Rs. 10,000/-.;