SANDEEP MEHTA,J. - (1.) The instant appeal has been preferred by the accused appellant Rama Kishan being aggrieved of the judgment dated 14.8.2002 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Anti Corruption Court, Bikaner in Criminal Case No. 4/2001 whereby, he was convicted and sentenced as below:- JUDGEMENT_129_LAWS(RAJ)12_2017_1.html Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.
(2.) Succinctly stated the facts essential and relevant for disposal of this appeal are noted herein below.
(3.) The appellant herein was posted as a Patwari at the relevant time in Patwar Halka Akasar, Tehsil Kolayat, District Bikaner. The complainant Shri Prithviraj Singh submitted a report to the Additional S.P., ACB, Bikaner on 6.5.2000 alleging inter alia that he was a resident of Shekhawat Farms Takiya Ki Chowki, Kalwad Road, Jhotwara and was currently persuing farming operations in Village Chani, Tehsil Kolayat. He, his uncle Kalyan Singh, father-in-law Ganesh Singh and mother-in-law Smt. Aruna Chouhan etc. purchased 8 murabbas i.e. 200 bighas of land located in Khasra No. 158 of village Chani from one Vivek Chabra s/o Madan Lal r/o Abohar through a power of attorney 6 of the 8 murabbas were registered in the name of respective purchasers whereas remaining 2 murabbas were purchased under agreements of sale. The complainant had completed all the requisite formalities in relation to those lands. Mutation, measurements etc, of the land were also carried out at the instance of the complainant himself. He had submitted the requisite application fees etc. for measurement of the land and requested the Patwari Chani i.e. the appellant herein for expediting the process. The patwari demanded a bribe of Rs. 25,000/- for carrying out measurement of the murabbas. Upon the complainant pleading for a lenient consideration, the patwari bargained and the deal was stuck at Rs. 17,000/- as bribe for carrying out the measurement. From the said sum of Rs. 17,000/-, an amount of Rs. 10,000/- had already been paid to the patwari and the remaining Rs. 7,000/- was to be paid and the accused was pressing hard for the same. The complainant had to procure copies of khatas and jamabandies of the land for the purpose of taking electricity connection and other formalities. He approached the patwari and asked him for certified copies of the documents. On this, the patwari told that the amount of Rs. 7,000/- was still pending towards the earlier deal and that he would have to cough up an additional amount of Rs. 20,000/- for getting copies of the documents. The complainant alleged in his report that in this manner, the patwari was demanding a total amount of Rs. 27,000/- as bribe for providing the copies of the documents in addition to the amount paid earlier. The said application was taken on record by the ACB officials and the complainant was provided a mini tape recorder for verification of demand of bribe. It is alleged that during the verification proceedings the accused was heard demanding a sum of Rs. 19,000/- from the complainant for doing his work. The bribe was to be paid at the house of the accused on 8.5.2000. The complainant presented himself at the ACB outpost, Bikaner on 8.5.2000 with a sum of Rs. 9,000/- which he could arrange with some difficulty. The trap laying officer summoned two independent witnesses namely, Rajendra Singh and Vijay Kumar Joshi. The currency notes presented by the complainant were initialled by the trap laying officer and were dusted with phenolphthalein powder and were placed in the complainant's pocket. The complainant was instructed to handle the same and to take out and pass on the tainted currency notes upon being demanded by the appellant herein. The complainant was again provided the mini tape recorder and was instructed to record the conversation likely to be held between him and the accused during exchange of the bribe money. The complainant was sent to the house of the appellant herein along with the panch witnesses Rajendra Singh and Vijay Kumar Joshi. A little later, the complainant came out of the house of the accused and gave the pre-arranged signal, on which the trap laying officer along with the other members of trap party, both the panch witnesses rushed into the house of the accused. The appellant was seen standing in the verandah of the house counting the 500 rupees notes. The trap laying officer Shri Niyaj Mohd. PW5 introduced himself to the accused who became alarmed on seeing the trap party and threw down the currency notes on the floor. The patwari was asked to furnish an explanation for accepting the amount on which, he blurted out that he had accepted any bribe and that the complainant Prithviraj Singh had given him the currency notes for examining and he was simply checking the notes to find out if they were genuine or not. The Patwari confronted Prithviraj that none of his works had been delayed and as to why he got him entangled in the case. The complainant controverted this suggestion and reiterated that the accused had demanded the bribe amount and after bickering about the shortfall in the settled bribe amount, he had accepted the currency notes worth Rs. 9,000/- in his own hands by way of bribe and was counting the same. The hands of the appellant were washed in a solution of Sodium Carbonate which turned pink. The wash was packed in separate bottles. The currency notes thrown down by the accused were picked up and on verification, were found to be the same ones passed on by the complainant and bore initials of trap laying officer Niyaj Mohd. Thereafter, the accused was questioned in detail and he told the trap laying officer that no work of Prithviraj was pending with him at that time. Prithviraj and his family members had executed six registered sale deeds of land in Khasra No. 158 and mutation had already been entered and had been verified. Copies of two jamabandies were demanded for fixing the tubewell which were provided to the complainant. The measurement of 150 bighas land was completed by 22-23 March, 2000. The explanation furnished by the accused was found satisfactory and accordingly he was arrested for the offences under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read with 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 after drawing requisite proceedings and thereafter, an FIR No. 29/2000 came to be registered at C.P.S., Jaipur. After investigation, the appellant herein was charge-sheeted for these offences. The trial Court framed charges against the appellant in these very terms. He pleaded guilty and claimed trial. The prosecution examined as many as six witnesses in support of its case. The accused denied the prosecution allegations in his statement recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C., 1973 and claimed that he had been falsely implicated in the case. No work of the complainant was pending with him and all the formalities required to be carried out by the accused appellant had been completed by March, 2000. The complainant's deal with Vivek Chabra could fructify in the fullest because Vivek Chabra refused to sell him the remaining 50 bighas of land as per the agreement. The complainant was angry and suspected that the appellant accused was responsible for fallout of the deal and that is why he lodged the totally false complaint against him. On the fateful day, the complainant approached the accused, showed him some currency notes suggesting that the news was circulating regarding the 500 Rs. Denomination notes being counterfeit and he had come to get the notes verified from the accused who started checking the same for their genuineness and during this process, the complainant got him trapped in furtherance of a fraudulent design. No witness was examined in defence on behalf of the appellant.;