K.S.GAREWAL,J - (1.) THIS judgment shall dispose of two connected appeals which have been filed by Mangal Lal, District Manager, Food Corporation of India, Bathinda and Balwant Singh, Assistant in the office of the District Manager, challenging their conviction by learned Special Judge, C.B.I., Punjab, Patiala vide judgment dated October 24, 1997 for offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The main charge against the appellants was that Mangal Lal had demanded and accepted a bribe of Rs. 10,000/- from Amrit Pal Goel on April 7, 1995 and asked the bribe giver to hand over this amount to his Assistant Balwant Singh. The bribe money was later recovered from Balwant Singh's possession when the office was raided by DSP Vigilance.
(2.) AMRIT Pal Goel (PW.11) was a partner of M/s. Mauli Ram Cotton Ginning Processing and General Mills, Budhlada. This Mill was supplied paddy for shelling for Government Agencies and after shelling the rice was packed in bags and supplied to the F.C.I. For the purpose, the Corporation allotted space for storage. On April 7, 1995, Amrit Pal Goel met Mangal Lal in his office at Bathinda and asked him to allot space for storing the bags of rice. Mangal Lal demanded Rs. 10,000/- as bribe for allotment of the space and asked Amrit Pal Goel to file an application for the purpose which is Ex.PW.7/1. Amrit Pal Goel had no money with him at that time, so he promised to pay the bribe after arranging for the money and was directed by Mangal Lal to return by noon. Amrit Pal Goel to the Bathinda bus stand where met Rattan Lal (PW-2) and apprised him of the situation. Rattan Lal advised Amrit Pal Goel not to give the bribe and instead approach the Vigilance Officer. Amrit Pal Goel arranged Rs. 10,000/- from a customer and, alongwith Rattan Lal went to the office of the Vigilance Bureau, where he met DSP Kuldip Singh. His statement Ex.PW.1/1 was recorded. Amrit Pal Goel produced 20 currency notes of the denomination of Rs. 500/- before DSP Kuldip Singh, phenolphthalein powder was applied to the currency notes and their numbers were also noted on memo Ex.PW.1/2 which was attested by Amrit Pal Goel and Rattan Lal. A trap was thus laid according to which Amrit Pal Goel was to hand over the money to Mangal Lal and Rattan Lal was to act as a shadow witness and give a signal to the raiding party after the money had passed. Thereafter endorsement Ex.PW.1/4 was made and the statement was sent for registration of the case to Police Station, Vigilance Bureau, Ferozepur. Manjit Singh Brar, P.C.S. District Transport Officer, Bathinda also joined the party. The raiding party went to the office of the appellants Amrit Pal Goel and Rattan Lal went inside while the remaining members of the party stood at some distance to wait for the signal. On seeing Amrit Pal Goel, Mangal Lal asked him if he had brought the bribe money whereupon Amrit Pal Goel replied in the affirmative. He was then told by Mangal Lal that his work was ready and would be done. Balwant Singh was called through a peon and Amrit Pal Goel was directed by Mangal Lal to hand over the bribe money to Balwant Singh which he did as directed. Balwant Singh counted the money and put it in the right pocket of his trousers. The above transaction was witnessed by Rattan Lal who then sent the pre-planned signal. DSP Kuldip Singh raided the office and was told by Amrit Pal Goel that the bribe money had been given to Balwant Singh at the instance of Mangal Lal. A solution of sodium carbonate in water was prepared. Both hands of Balwant Singh were got washed in the solution and the colour turned pink. The solution was sealed in nip Ex.P.1 which was taken into possession vide memo Ex.PW.1/5 attested by Amrit Pal Goel, Rattan Lal and Manjit Singh Brar, D.T.O. Personal search of Balwant Singh was conducted and 20 notes of he denomination of Rs. 500/- were recovered from the right pocket of his trousers. The numbers of the notes were compared with the numbers written on the memo and they tallied with each other. The recovered notes Ex.P.2 to Ex.P.22 were taken into possession vide memo Ex.PW16. The right pocket of trousers of Balwant Singh was washed in sodium carbonate solution and colour turned pink. The solution was put in a nip Ex.P22 and the trousers Ex.P.23 were taken into possession vide memo Ex.PW.1/8. The above is the complete sequence. On completion of the investigation, the appellants were tried. The prosecution examined eleven witnesses, principal being DSP Kuldip Singh (P.W.1), Rattan Lal (P.W.2), Manjit Singh Brar (P.W.3) and Amrit Pal Goel (P.W.11). The accused/appellants were called upon to give their statements under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and they offered detailed explanations. Mangal Lal denied the incident though he admitted that he had received the application for the allotment of space to M/s. Mauli Ram Cotton Ginning Processing and General Mills, Budhlada. The application was processed by his office and the file was handed over to the concerned clerk before the raid. DSP Kuldip Singh accompanied by Amrit Pal Goel came to his office at noon and asked him as to why he was not doing the work. He replied that the work had already been done. Thereafter the DSP and Amrit Pal Goel threatened him. Balwant Singh also reached there. The F.C.I. Staff held a demonstration against the DSP whereupon both he and Balwant Singh were forcibly taken to the Vigilance Bureau. Balwant Singh's version was that he worked in the storage branch dealing with labour, carnage, transportation and court cases etc. On April 7, 1995 he had prepared the agenda for Mangal Lal to be taken to Chandigarh for the meeting of District Managers and given it to Mangal Lal at 8.00 a.m. He came to the office at noon and while he was having tea with his colleagues, the District Manager's peon came and informed him that Mangal Lal had called him. When he went to Mangal Lal's office, he saw two men there. They were quarrelling with Mangal Lal and he intervened to ask them as to what the matter was. Those two men tried to put something in his pocket at the instance of Mangal Lal and in the meantime he got confused as to what happened. The accused/appellants did not lead any defence evidence apart from relying on certain documents.
(3.) THE trial Court framed eight points for determination and came to the conclusion that demand of bribe had been made by Mangal Lal though acceptance of the bribe by Balwant Singh was at the instance of Mangal Lal. Balwant Singh did receive the money. There was nexus between the two of them. It was also held that there was a valid reason or motive for the appellants to accept illegal gratification which had been demanded by Mangal Lal and was accepted by Balwant Singh on the direction of Mangal Lal. Furthermore, the money was recovered from the possession of Balwant Singh. The various discrepancies and infirmities in the prosecution case were discussed but were found to be not of much importance. Lastly, it was held that the defence pleas were not trustworthy as the incident proved itself. The sanction was found to be valid and the appellants were convicted.;