9911796707
TMI Blog1997 (12) TMI 635X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... money. There is no material discrepancy in the evidence regarding preparation of recovery-memo and the minor contradiction mentioned by the learned single judge is not worth considering. No doubt that the High Court has misdirected itself by such patently wrong and tenuous considerations and it resulted in the unmerited acquittal of accused against whom the prosecution succeeded in making out a fool-proof case under Section 161 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act 1947. Allow that state appeal and restore the conviction passed by the trial court. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tes amounting to ₹ 400/- were handed over to the respondent on 23.5.1981, but the bribe-taker was soon intercepted by the Anti-Corruption squad with the tainted cash. The currency notes were seized from him and phenolphthalein test conducted showed a positive result. Apart from the evidence of the complainant, PW-5 (Satpal Singh) and PW-4 - Harendra Singh Sirohi (DSP of Anti-Corruption Bureau, Nainital), Prosecution examined two other witnesses who were present when the delinquent officer was caught red-handed. They are PW6-Lokesh Pal Singh and PW 7-Khem Singh (who was driver of the vehicle in which the Anti-corruption officials travelled). The Special Judge, who tried the case found the evidence of the aforesaid witnesses reliable, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ise it with greater care, but it does not call for outright rejection of his evidence at the threshold. A pedantic approach rejecting the evidence of a complainant simply on the premise that he was aggrieved against the bribe-taker, would only help corrupt officials getting insulated from legal consequences. Evidence of three defence witnesses (DW 1 to DW 3) helped the respondent to make out that termination of the illegal occupancy was imminent because on 20.5.1981 itself respondent had sent up the proposal to the Tehsildar for taking eviction proceedings in respect of Naubat's occupancy. Assuming that the version given by DW 1 to DW3 was correct, even so there was no bar for PW5 to approach the respondent for regularising the occupan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es involving police raid or police search is incorporated in the statute not for the purpose of helping the indicted person to bypass the evidence of those panch witnesses who have had some acquaintance with the police or officers conducting the search at some time or the other Acquaintance with the police by itself would not destroy a man s independent outlook. In a society where police involvement is a regular phenomenon many people would get acquainted with the police. But as long as they are not dependent on the police for their living or liberty or for any other matter, it cannot be said that those are not independent persons. Of the police in order to carry out official duties, have sought the help of any other person he would not for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d in the phial was not sent to chemical Examiner is too puerile for acceptance. We have not come across any case where a trap was conducted by the police in which the phenolphtalein solution was sent to the Chemical Examiner. We know that the said solution is always used not because there is any such direction by the statutory public servant would have really handled the bribed money. There is no material discrepancy in the evidence regarding preparation of recovery-memo and the minor contradiction mentioned by the learned single judge is not worth considering. The two remaining reasons i.e nobody over-heard the demand made by there respondent for bribe and that the amount was found not in the right pocket but only in the left pocket,. are ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
