- (1.) DETAILS of the appeal This appeal is preferred against judgment of conviction and order of sentence, both dated 19.7.2004 passed by the Special Judge, Patiala, vide which accused -appellant Daljit Kumar (hereinafter referred to as the accused) was held guilty in case FIR No.57 dated 30.9.1999 registered at Police Station, Vigilance Bureau, Patiala under Sections 7 and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter mentioned as the Act) and was sentenced as under: JUDGEMENT_880_LAWS(P&H)5_20141.htm However, both the substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently. Case of the prosecution
(2.) THE prosecution case, put in brief, is as under: 2.1 Chajju Singh (hereinafter mentioned as the complainant) is an agriculturist. He wanted to maintain records of his land holdings and also required the same for some court case and thus, required copy of Jamabandi. For this purpose, he contacted the accused on 29.9.1999 who was posted as Patwari. The accused demanded Rs.800/ - as bribe from the complainant to supply him a copy of Jamabandi. The matter was, however, settled at Rs.400/ -. 2.2 As the complainant was not interested to pay the amount, he alongwith one Gurmukh Singh, went to report the matter to the Vigilance Department on 30.9.1999. On the statement of the complainant, a formal FIR was registered. Narinderpal Kaushal DSP (Vigilance) planned a raid. The complainant gave 4 currency notes of Rs.100/ - each to the investigating officer who returned the same to the complainant after treating those with phenolphthalein powder (hereinafter mentioned as P. Powder). The demonstration of P. Powder was given to the complainant and Gurmukh Singh, and a memo in this regard was prepared wherein details of these currency notes had also been noted. 2.3 As planned, said currency notes were to be handed over by the complainant to the accused on demand. Gurmukh Singh was to act as a shadow witness. He was then to give a prefixed signal to the remaining members of the raiding party after the tainted currency notes were to exchange hands from the complainant to the accused on demand. Harjit Singh, Accountant, Nagar Panchayat, village Ghagga was joined in the raiding party. Only the complainant and shadow witness were to go to the accused at first instance and rest of the members of the raiding party were to wait for receipt of the stated signal to be given by the shadow witness. As per planning, the complainant and shadow witness went to the office of the accused. Remaining raiding party stayed behind. Its members were standing scattered at different nearby locations to avoid crowding. 2.4 It is further the case of the prosecution that on demand, the tainted currency notes were handed over to the accused, who then gave copy of Jamabandi to the complainant. Pre -determined signal was given by the shadow witness to the investigating officer. Receiving signal from the shadow witness, the investigating officer reached the office of the accused alongwith other members of the party. The DSP (investigating officer) introduced himself to the accused. Hands of the accused were dipped into the solution of sodium carbonate prepared in a glass of water. The colour of the solution turned red. The said solution was put in a nip which then was sealed and was taken in possession by the police. Four currency notes were recovered from the drawer of the accused, details of which tallied with details of currency notes in the pre -trap memo. The said currency notes were taken in possession by the investigating officer. Copy of Jamabandi was also taken in possession by the police. Statements of witnesses were recorded. Investigations were completed and on completion of investigations, report under Section 173 Cr.PC was finalised. Charge against the accused
(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. Evidence of the prosecution The prosecution examined as many as 13 witnesses. To sustain and support the charge against the accused, in addition to the complainant (PW11), the prosecution had placed heavy reliance on deposition of shadow -witness Gurmukh Singh (PW9) and independent witness Harjit Singh (PW8). The investigating officer DSP Narinderpal Kaushal (PW13) was also examined to strengthen the prosecution case. Balbir Kaur (PW1) had proved sanction order (Ex.PA). Other witnesses are of formal nature and need not be discussed in detail. Statement of the accused under Section 313 Cr.PC and defence evidence;