SAROJ BALA,J. - (1.) THIS criminal appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 22.12.2005 whereby convicting the appellant R.K. Verma for the offence punishable under sections 7 and 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and sentencing him to simple imprisonment for one year with fine of Rs. 5000/- with default clause for the offence under section 7 of the Act and simple imprisonment for two years with fine of Rs. 10,000/- with default clause for the offence under section 13(2) of the Act.
(2.) THE back ground facts giving rise to the appeal are these : The appellant posted as J.T.O. Tele­phone Exchange Rampur U.P. on 9.7.2002 demanded bribe money of Rs. 700/- from the complainant Shoaib Ullah Siddiqui (P.W.2) for shifting S.T.D. P.C.O. Telephone No. 341081 of Salim Mian (P.W.8) from Peela Talab, Rampur to Bans Mandi Purana Ganj, near Gupta Nursing Home Rampur. Shoaib Ulla Siddiqui was doing parvi for gelling the telephone shifted. On 21.6.2002 a demand note of Rs. 630/- was issued by the telephone department. The said amount was deposited on 28.6.2002 and telephone line was disconnected. The advice note was issued on 1.7.2002 by the Commercial Offi­cer and was in the custody of the appellant. The complainant met the appellant twice or thrice in connection with shifting of tele­phone but the telephone was not shifted. Again the complainant met the appellant on 9.7.2002 and requested for shifting the telephone but the appellant demanded Rs. 700/- as illegal gratification. A written complaint (Ext. Ka-12) was made to S.P. C.B.I. Deharadun on 13.7.2002 and Special Case No. R.C. 11(A) of 2002/D.A.D. was registered. In pursuant to the complaint made by (P.W.2) the currency notes which were intended to be given to the appellant were treated with phenolphthalein powder on the direction of Inspector J.P. Dobhal (P.W.9) and arrangements for the trap were made. The tainted currency notes were of­fered by the complainant (P.W.2) to the appellant who accepted them in the pres­ence of public witness Sulabh Singh (P.W.4). The C.B.I, team, waiting outside on being signalled entered the office room of appellant and recovered tainted currency notes kept under a file at his table. The numbers of tainted currency notes tallied with the numbers mentioned in the pre-trap memo. Both the hands of the appellant were separately dipped in the water and colour of the water turned pink. The pink mixture was sealed in two separate bottles. The recovered tainted notes were sealed in a envelop. The signatures of team members and public witnesses were taken on sealed envelops and bottles. The recovery memo (Ext. Ka-4) was prepared and the appellant was taken into custody. The appellant was charged for the of­fences under section 7 and section 13(1) (d) read with section 13 (2) of the Act to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. At the trial C.B.I., examined twelve witnesses in all. P.K. Chandra (P.W.1) was posted as Advisor H.R.D. and was appoint­ing authority of appellant. He granted sanction for prosecution (Ext. Ka-1) against the appellant. S.U. Siddiqui (P.W.2) was the complainant. Sajid Ali Khan (P.W.3) proved the seizure memo (Ext. Ka-5) ad­vice note (Ext. Ka-6) and counter signature on the shifting application (Ext. Ka-7). Sulabh Singh (P.W.4) and Satish Singh (P.W.5) were public witnesses to the trap. P. Nath (P.W.6) was posted as Senior Sci­entific Officer at C.F.S.L. C.B.I. Delhi and examined the contents of the bottles and tainted currency notes. He proved the test report (Ext. Ka-9). Ram Chandra (P.W.7) proved advice note (Ext. Ka-6.) Salim Mian (P.W.8) was consumer of telephone in question. J.P. Dobhal (P.W.9) was posted as Inspector C.B.I. Dehradun and headed the trap party. S.I. R.P. Sharma (P.W.10) and S.I. Devendra Singh (P.W.1 1) were mem­bers of trap party. Smt. Shama Maruf (P.W.12) was Investigating Officer of this case. The appellant in his statement un­der section 313 Cr.P.C. denied having de­manded Rs. 700/- from the complainant and having been caught red handed by the C.B.I, trap team while accepting the said amount. He admitted that C.B.I, team had made a trap. He denied having accepted the bribe money. He admitted that his hands were washed in water but could not tell due to memory lapse that the water turned pink. He denied the recovery of tainted currency notes. He admitted the recovery memo (Ext. Ka-4) was prepared and his signatures were taken over it. He admitted that sanction for prosecution (Ext. Ka-11) was granted by P.K. Chandra. (P.W.1). According to him he has been falsely implicated. The appellant did not examine any witness in defence.
(3.) ON appraisal of evidence the Trial Court came to the conclusion that sanction was granted after application of mind. The demand and acceptance of bribe was proved beyond reasonable doubt.;