9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Conviction under Section 161 IPC and Section 5(2) read with Section 5(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act - Demand of illegal gratification for official favor - Interpretation of "reward" in Section 161 IPC. Analysis: The appellant was convicted under Section 161 IPC and Section 5(2) read with Section 5(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act for receiving a bribe of Rs. 30 from P.W. 1 as a motive for favoring him in his official capacity. The appellant, a Lower Division Clerk at a government hospital, demanded the bribe from P.W. 1 for recommending the acceptance of his tender. The prosecution's case was supported by evidence showing the appellant's demand and acceptance of the bribe. The appellant's defense of being trapped was not accepted, and the court found the prosecution's version credible. The appellant's argument that the bribe received was a reward for past services rendered and not covered under Section 161 IPC was dismissed by the court. The court interpreted the term "reward" in Section 161 IPC to include payments for past services, contrary to the appellant's contention. Referring to a previous judgment, the court held that "reward" in the context of the section encompasses payments for past services, and any other interpretation would lead to absurd results. Therefore, the appellant's convictions under Section 161 IPC and the Prevention of Corruption Act were upheld. Regarding the sentence, the court considered the appellant's circumstances, being a middle-aged man with a meager salary who had already lost his job and spent a week in jail. Taking these factors into account, the court decided to reduce the appellant's sentence to the period already served, showing leniency in the sentencing. The appeal was ultimately dismissed with the modification in the sentence, reducing the imprisonment term to time already undergone.
|
