Mahesh Bhagwati, J. - (1.) CHALLENGE in this appeal is to the judgment dated 1st March, 1996, rendered by Special Judge (Prevention of Corruption Case), Jaipur whereby the accused respondent Mohan Prakash was acquitted in the offences under Section 7 and 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to Act 19.88).
(2.) PROSECUTION version as unfolded during trial is as follows: That on 22nd January, 1992 PW/6 Ramphool submitted a written report Ex.P/8 before Dy.SP. ACD, Bundi stating therein that the accused respondent Mohan Prakash Saxena was a village patwari. He had, sent a list of poor persons of that village to be benefited by Antyodaya Yozna' which included his name. The village Patwari Mohan Prakash Saxena solicited for bribe of 100 rupees for recommending his name but he did not pay the same to him. It is alleged that thereafter he needed a bonafide resident certificate for his employment. The complainant came to talk on 19th January, 1992, contacted Mohan Prakash Saxena Patwari and prayed him to issue a bonafide resident certificate whereupon he solicited for a bribe of 100 rupees in lieu of issuing the same. The complainant did not intend to pay the bribe amount to the accused respondent and wanted an action to be taken against him. PW/9 Mahaveer Prasad the then Dy.S.P. RSBI, Bundi camp at Tonk initiated proceedings on his complaint and formulated a scheme for entrapping the accused Mohan Prakash. He co -opted two independent witnesses PW/7 Shri Harlsh Chandra Gupta and PW/8 Shri Amir Ahmed. The complainant gave five currency notes each of the denomination of 20 rupees to the Dy.S.P. who initialed them and got phenolphthalein powder applied thereupon and returned the same to the complainant for handing them over to the accused Mohan Prakash on demand. The trap party proceeded to village Vazirabad where the accused Mohan Prakash was issuing receipts to the Khatedari tenants of land while sitting in a room of school. It is alleged that in the beginning the accused refused to take 100 rupees and asked the complainant to give them to his Class -IV. Ultimately, the complainant succeeded in giving those 100 rupees to the accused who on receiving a signal from the complainant, was trapped red handed by PW/9 Shri Mahaveer Prasad Dy. S.P. RSBI, Bundi who was associated by two independent witnesses and other police personnels. In fact, Shri Mahaveer Prasad prepared a detailed report Ex.P/12, recovery memo of currency notes Ex.P/13, prepared site plan Ex.P/14, and lodged the FIR Ex.P/20 whereupon the investigation commenced. The investigating Officer recorded the statements of the witnesses acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the case, obtained the prosecution sanction Ex.P/5 from District Magistrate Tonk and after usual investigation submitted a police report under Section 173 (2) of Cr.P.C. against the accused in the competent Court.
(3.) THE accused Mohan Prakash was indicted for the offence under Section 7 and 13(1) (d) (2) of 'Act, 1988' who pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. In order to further its version the prosecution examined nine witnesses. In his explanation under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. the accused claimed innocence. He also adduced the written statements in the Court under Section 243 (1) of Cr.P.C. On completion of trial the learned trial Court did not find the accused guilty and acquitted him as indicated hereinabove.;