R.K.MERATHIA, J. - (1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 14.6.2002 and 15.6.2002 respectively, passed by Sri D. 'K. Lal, Special Judge, Vigilance, Ranchi in Special Case No. 4 of 2001, convicting the appellant under Sections 7 and 13(2) read with Section 13(i)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and sentencing him to undergo RI for one year under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act and a fine of Rs. 2,000/ - and to undergo 1 and 1/2 year under Section 13(2), read with Section 13(2)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and to pay a fine of Rs. 3,000/ -. In default of payment of fine, further imprisonment was awarded. Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently with the period already undergone to be set off.
(2.) THE prosecution case, in brief, is that one Vinod Kumar Singh applied for grant of death certificate of his deceased brother on 2.3.2001 in the office of Ranchi Municipal Corporation. It is alleged that appellant demanded Rs. 500/ - (Five hundred) as bribe for the same. Ashok Kumar Singh, who is the cousin of Vinod Kumar Singh, gave a written complaint (Ext. 5) on 19.3.2001 before the D.G.P. (Vigilance), Ranchi against the said conduct of the appellant. Enquiry was made, and an Enquiry Report (Ext. 6) was submitted on the same day finding truth in the allegation. A trap was organized after following the procedure and appellant was caught accepting the bribe money and the same was recovered from his pocket in presence of the independent witnesses after performing the formalities of search. His hands and the pocket of shirt were chemically examined. Appellant was charged under the aforesaid Sections to which he pleaded In support of the appeal, Mr. Jai Prakash, learned counsel submitted that no application was made for issuance of death certificate on 2.3.2001, as alleged. From the application (Ext. 8), it will appear that the same was received on 15.3.2001. Therefore, the allegation of making application on 2.3.2001 and demanding bribe on 5.3.2001 and 12.3.2001 is baseless. He further submitted that the Death Certificate was prepared and signed by the competent authority on 17.3.2001 and therefore there was no occasion or reason to demand and accept bribe on 19.3.2001. He further submitted that from Ext. B, which is a report of Hand Writing Expert, it will appear that the said application for issue of death certificate (Ext. 8) and the said complaint (Ext. 5} were written by one person, but they are in different name. Mr. Jai Prakash, therefore, submitted that the application for issuance of the Death Certificate, which is the basis of the case, becomes doubtful.
(3.) MR . A.K. Kashyap, learned counsel appearing for the Vigilance Department, submitted that the purported report of Hand Writing Expert (Ext. B) is based on comparison of photo copies of handwriting. Therefore it cannot be relied. Moreover this report was prepared in presence of the son of the appellant and was submitted at the instance of the appellant. He further submitted that the younger brother of Vinod Kumar Singh namely late Pramod Narain Singh, who was posted as constable in Doranda. Police Station, was killed by criminals on or about 22.1.2001. Ashok Kumar Singh (PW 8} has stated that he went with his cousin Vinod Kumar Singh to the Municipal Office to apply for the Death Certificate. In para 9 of his evidence, this witness has stated that Vinod Kumar Singh used to live at his village, Shambhupur in the district of Vaishali. Mr. Kashyap submitted that for the sake of argument even if it is accepted that the complaint to the Vigilance Department was written by Vinod Kumar Singh in the name of his cousin -Ashok Kumar Singh; it cannot be said that the complaint itself is doubtful. Mr. Kashyap further submitted that the death certificate prepared/signed on 17.3.2001 was not given without accepting the bribe money on 19.3.2001 when the appellant was caught red handed in trap.;