Judgment

KRISHNA IYER, J. :- The appellant, a quondam Inspector of Central Excise has argued his case with perspicacity and plausibility, taking liberal advantage of our solicitude for giving this layman a lengthy hearing. The charge, broadly stated, is one of corruption falling under Section 161, Indian Penal Code, and Section 5(1)(d), read with section 5(2), of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947; the proof of guilt is built on a trap laid by the Special Police Establishment, apparently clinched by processes of chemical detection; and the uphill task of the accused is to challenge in this court, under Article 136, the concurrent findings upholding his culpability. Undaunted, he has attempted to explain the incriminating evidence with adroitness worthy of a better cause and has taken us critically through the testimony of the P. Ws. In an effort to substantive a credible case for his exculpation.

2. Now, the story, P. W. 1, a young man in his late twenties, had started a small factory in Shadara, called Uma Engineering Corporation, for making insulated copper cables, around June, 1965. The whole process, except fitting the rubber insulation, was done in his premises and for this latter purpose the semi-finished goods used to be taken to another factory in Delhi. Insulated coils being dutiable articles, the Excise authorities had to issue gate passes for removal of even half-finished items. According to a certain practice that prevailed till a little before the alleged commission of the offence, when the article was not fully manufactured, its removal for the completion of the process was permitted without levy of duty in advance and gate passes were issued on this basis. However, this was a doubtful procedure and the accused did insist, at certain stage, that even removal for further processing was permissible only on payment of duty, thus antagonishing P.W. 1 and hampering his business. Eventually, the Assistant Collector, as per Exhibit D-1, upheld the accused s stand and directed duty paid clearance or adherence to the system of bonds for payment later, according to Rule 56-A of the relevant rules. Apart from this, even duty paid finished goods could not leave the factory premises before a pro forma (c.f. Ex. D-2) was filed in, verified by the Excise Inspector and signed by him. The embryonic industrialist. P.W.1, when faced with the insistence on duty payment made contacts with the accused and was asked to initiate himself into the magical means of getting things done through monthly payments of Rs. 100/- as speed money . Being too virgin for this way to prosperity, P.W. 1 reacted by making a bee line to Sri Waswani, the Deputy Superintendent, Central Excise, with little benefit. Again, on August 4,1965 be met the accused for getting him to verify, the statement of manufactured goods to pay the duty thereon, but was turned back, the softening sum of Rs.100/- not having been offered.

3. We now move to the critical phase. On August 6, 1965,P.W. 1 goes to the office of the accused to get clearance of 2 finished bundles of cables. The demand for money is repeated but by this time P.W. 1 acquires skill in courtship and bargains for a smaller sum of Rs. 50/-. Whereupon the accused signs the challan for the deposit of the excise duty on these finished products (vide Ex. P-4). The bribe, according to the understanding, is fixed to be paid next day in the afternoon. At this stage, P. W. 1 changes his mind and discloses his bosom to the S.P.E. officers the next morning at Kotah House (Ex. P-5). The Deputy Superintendent of Police, P.W. 7, swings into action with professional proficiency. Two officials, P.W. 3 and P.W. 4, from two different offices, are fixed up to witness the search; the programme of trapping is finalised and dramatised, the signal and other details worked out, the 5 currency notes making up Rs. 50/- smeared with phenolphthalein powder and the visible chemical reaction when even small particles thereof are dipped