Judgment

BHARGAVA, J.:- Hira Lal appellant was tried by the Special Judge of Rohtak for an offence punishable under S. 165A of the Indian Penal Code on the charge that he offered to pay a sum of Rs. 1100/- to Kundan Lal Sahwney, Station House Officer, Police Station City Rohtak for allowing him and his associates to carry on Satta gambling The prosecution case was that, on 9th July, 1967, at 9.45 a. m., the appellant approached Sub-Inspector Kundan Lal at the Police Station, told him that he was carrying on khaiwali Satta in association with Mangtu, Omi and Jaggu and offered to pay him a sum of Rs. 1100/- per mensem as illegal gratification, provided Kundan Lal promised to shield him and his associates in those gambling activities. Kundan Lal kept quiet and the appellant left promising to come to the police station at 3 p.m. to give the sum of Rs. 1100/-. According to Kundan Lal, he made an entry of this incident in the daily diary of the police station and also took into confidence the Superintendent of Police, Rohtak. Thereafter, he organised a trap party which included three persons, Amir Singh, Chaudhary Ram and Ram Rang. These members of the party sat in an adjoining room at about 2.45 p.m., while Kundan Lal continued in his own office where the appellant came at 3 p.m. The appellant again told Kundan Lal that he would continue to pay Rs. 1100/- on the first of every month, while he and his associates should be allowed to indulge in Khaiwali Satta. Thereafter, the appellant took out a bundle of currency notes from his pocket and offered them to Kundan Lal. As this money was being passed on, the three persons associated in the trap, viz., Amir Singh, Chaudhary Ram and Ram Rang entered the office. In their presence, Kundan Lal counted the currency notes which were found to contain nine currency notes of the denomination of Rs. 100/- each and twenty currency notes of Rs. 10/- each, making up a total of Rs. 1100/-. Kundan Lal took the currency notes into possession and recorded a recovery report. He detained Hiralal, while he recorded a First Information Report of this incident. Thereafter, Harinder Singh, Deputy Supdt. of Police, Rohtak, came to the police station on a telephone call at about 3.30 p.m. He then investigated the case which was sent to Court after investigation. The Special Judge accepted this case of the prosecution, convicted Hira Lal appellant for the offence under section 165A of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year. He also ordered confiscation of the sum of Rs. 1100/- which, according to the prosecution, was given by him as bribe to Kundan Lal. On appeal, the High Court of Punjab and Haryana upheld the conviction, but reduced the substantive sentence of

rigorous imprisonment from a period of one year to six months. The appellant then applied for a certificate under Art. 134 (1) (c) of the Constitution. The High Court granted the certificate on two grounds. One ground was that the appeal in this Court would involve consideration of the question whether Kundan Lal, Amir Singh and Ram Rang, who were the only witnesses examined, were accomplices and required corroboration by independent witnesses before their evidence could be believed. The second ground related to the question whether Kundan Lal, in taking the steps, after he was approached in the morning by the appellant, of laying the trap, carried on investigation which he was not authorised to do under section 5A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947, which required that the investigation must be by an officer of a rank not below that of a Deputy Superintendent of Police unless there was an order of the Magistrate of the First Class authorising him to investigate; and there was no such order of the Magistrate in this case. This appeal has thus been brought up to this Court on the basis of the certificate granted under Art. 134 (1) (c) of the Constitution. In this appeal, we had passed orders on November