- (1.) THIS appeal is directed against judgment of conviction and order of sentence, both dated 8.4.2003 passed by Special Judge, Fatehgarh Sahib, vide which accused -appellant Assistant Sub -Inspector Randhir Singh was held guilty in case FIR No.54 dated 18.9.1999 registered at Police Station, Vigilance Bureau, Patiala for commission of offence punishable under Sections 7 and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter mentioned as the Act) and was sentenced as under: JUDGEMENT_547_LAWS(P&H)3_20141.htm However, both the substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently.
(2.) THE prosecution case, put in a narrow compass, is as under: The accused was posted as ASI in Police Station, Mandi Gobindgarh. M/s North India Pipe Limited, Dirba, District Sangrur was engaged in manufacturing of iron pipes after purchasing raw material from Mandi Gobindgarh. Thereafter, it used to sell their final products i.e. iron pipes in the open market in and outside the State of Punjab. For bringing raw material from Mandi Gobindgarh to their company and for sending the finished products in and outside the State of Punjab, the company was using its own trucks. Truck No.PB -13G -1684 of the company had met with an accident on 15.9.1999. The said truck had been impounded by the police of Mandi Gobindgarh. Baldev Singh, an employee of the company on coming to know of the accident had sent the information to Megh Raj, Director of the company. The truck was to be released on Superdari. The matter regarding involvement of driver of their truck was to be solved. On 17.9.1999, accountant Baldev Singh went to the Court Complex, Amloh and for release of the truck on Superdari, had made an application through a lawyer. This application was marked to SHO, Police Station, Mandi Gobindgarh for his report. The complainant accompanied by accountant Baldev Singh, then went to Police Station, Mandi Gobindgarh. The accused was investigating the said case. He demanded Rs.25,000/ - for making report on the application for release of the truck on Superdari, to which proposition the complainant did not agree. Finally, the matter was settled at Rs.8,000/ -. As the complainant did not want to pay the bribe money, he came back with a false promise to the accused to meet him again on 18.9.1999. On return to his office at Dirba, the complainant talked about the entire episode to his Munim Narain Dutt. Taking a decision to report the matter to the police, the complainant approached DSP (Vigilance), Patiala and made his statement (Ex.P4) on which endorsement (Ex.P4/A) was made and on its basis, formal FIR (Ex.P4/B) was registered. A trap was organized to nab the accused while accepting the demanded bribe. To achieve that end, the complainant produced 16 notes of denomination of Rs.500/ - each, details whereof were taken down in a separate memorandum. Applying phenolphthalein powder (hereinafter mentioned as P. Powder) thereon, the said currency notes were handed over to the complainant vide memo Ex.P5. These were to be given to the accused as demanded bribe. Narain Dutt was put as a shadow witness. He was to accompany the complainant and was to pass on a signal to the raiding party after the tainted currency notes were to be passed over by the complainant to the accused. On their way, the investigating officer had also joined one Devinder Kumar, a teacher, to witness the entire episode. It is further the case of the prosecution that thereafter, the raiding party, as planned, left for laying a trap on the accused in his office. Complainant Megh Raj and shadow witness Narain Dutt went inside the office. On receiving the pre -settled signal from shadow witness Narain Dutt, the investigating officer accompanied by other members of the raiding party went inside the office of the accused. On reaching inside, the investigating officer introduced himself, and told the accused not to change his position. Thereafter, spot investigations started. Investigating officer arranged a glass of water wherein sodium carbonate powder was added. Thereafter, hands of the accused one by one were got dipped into that solution which resulted in change of colour of the water to light pink. It was then transferred in a separate nip which was sealed by the investigating officer. Said nip was taken into possession vide memo (Ex.P7). The currency notes were recovered from the Dak file. Their details were compared with details as had been recorded in a memo already prepared. Details of the currency notes recovered, tallied with the details of currency notes in the memo. Application of the complainant for Superdari of the truck on which the accused was to make report (Ex.P10) had also been taken in possession during investigations vide memo (Ex.P11). Police file pertaining to investigations, of this case was also taken into possession by memo (Ex.P11). Statements of witnesses were recorded. Investigations were completed. Handwash nip was sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory for analysis. On completion of investigations, report under Section 173 Cr.PC was finalised.
(3.) ON being charge -sheeted for commission of the offences under Sections 7 and 13(2) of the Act, the accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. To sustain the charge against the accused, the prosecution examined as many as nine witnesses. In addition to the complainant (PW5), the prosecution had placed heavy reliance on deposition of shadow -witness Narain Dutt (PW7) and independent witness Devinder Kumar (PW8). The investigating officer DSP Bhag Singh (PW9) was also examined to strengthen the prosecution case. Baldev Singh (PW5/A) had proved sanction order Ex.PW13, whereas ASI Traffic Satwinder Singh proved the office order Ex.P3 regarding posting of the accused. Other witnesses are of formal nature and need not be discussed in detail.;