STATE OF PUNJAB Vs. VINOD KUMAR
LAWS(P&H)-2013-3-385
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Decided on March 11,2013

STATE OF PUNJAB Appellant
VERSUS
VINOD KUMAR Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) The instant application has been filed under Section 378(3) Cr.P.C. for grant of leave to appeal against the impugned judgment dated 05.08.2010 passed by the learned Special Judge, Ferozepur, whereby respondent has been acquitted of the charge framed against him under Sections 7, 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
(2.) Brief facts of the case are that Manjit Singh complainant approached DSP, Vigilance Bureau, Ferozepur and got recorded his statement (Ex.P9) to the effect that: "he is resident of village Dodewala and is agriculturist by profession. They are two brothers having 40 acres of land which falls in joint name. With their consent, they partitioned the land and have reduced the same into writing and for getting the same sanctioned he approached the area Patwari Vinod Kumar on 26.2.2007. Patwari asked him to come again and when on 1.3.2007 he again approached the Patwari i.e. the accused and presented before him copy of family partition having been marked by the Naib Tehsildar, Abohar to get the joint khata partitioned, Patwari put off the matter on one pretext or the other. Finally, he asked him if he had to get his work done, he would have to pay Rs.8,000/- as expenses and then matter was settled at Rs.5,000/-. Since the complainant did not want to give bribe, so he told him that today he is not having money with him, whereupon, accused asked him to come tomorrow along with money. The complainant went away and today i.e. 2.3.2007 when he, for his personal work, had come to Abohar Amarjit Singh met him on the Bus stand to whom he narrated the entire occurrence, who asked that bribe should not be paid and such like corrupt officials should be arrested by the Vigilance Bureau. Thereafter, he came to the office of DSP, Vigilance and presented before him Rs.5,000/- currency notes and requested for taking legal action against the accused."
(3.) On the basis of statement (Ex.P9), FIR (Ex.P9/A) was recorded. The Investigation Officer arranged two official witnesses, namely Sucha Singh and Sandeep Singh. Thereafter, raid was conducted at the premises of the office of the accused-respondent and when complainant gave money to the accused, shadow witness gave agreed signal and then raid was conducted and accused was arrested and tainted money was recovered from the drawer of the accused. Thereafter, Glass tumbler was arranged, solution was prepared in which earlier hand of official witnesses were got washed and thereafter, hands of the accused were got washed.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.