SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1975 Supreme(SC) 381

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
P.N. BHAGWATI AND R.S. SARKARIA, JJ.
Sat Paul, Appellant
Versus
Delhi Administration, Respondent.
Criminal Appeal No. 137 of 1971
Decided on 30-9-1975.
Advocates appeared
Mr. Frank Anthony, Sr. Advocate, (M/s. O. P. Soni and E. C. Agarwala, Advocates with him), for Appellant; M/s. V.C. Mahajan and R. N. Sachthey Advocates, for Respondent.
 

Advocates:
E.C.AGARWAL, FRANK ANTHONY, O.P.Soni, R.N.SACH, V.C.MAHAJAN

Headnote:

Indian Penal Code - Section 161 - Prevention of Corruption Act – Section 5 (2) – Criminal Procedure Code - 342, 162, 288 - Evidence Act – Section 8 - Anti-Corruption Staff - (PW 1), (PW 2) and (PW 8) went to Railway Station to receive one, who was expected from Bombay train - Finding them loitering there, a constable of the Railway police took them to the appellant at the Railway Police Post where he was posted as an Assistant Sub-Inspector - Appellant gave a beating and demanded an explanation as to why they had come to Railway Station - They had come to receive one who was expected from Bombay by train - Appellant questioned was being brought to Delhi for prostitution - Companions refuted the insinuation and informed the appellant was a dancing girl and not a prostitute - Appellant then demanded a bribe from party, warning that in event of non-payment, they would be implicated in some case - Ramesh paid Rs. 30/- there and then to appellant - Latter insisted that they would not be released unless they paid balance of Rs. 70/-. On the suggestion of women, appellant detained Ramesh but let off the women with direction to send the balance - Evidence of these interested witnesses of the trap remains unconfirmed and uncorroborated by any independent evidence. In the peculiar circumstances of the case, we think that it would be highly unsafe to convict the appellant on the basis of their testimony, particularly when P.Ws. 1, 7 and 8 are persons of bad antecedents and had a possible motive to see the accused removed permanently from the way of their immoral activity - Evidence of defence witnesses particularly that of D. Ws. 3 and 5, was not successfully impeached in cross-examination - High Court has not touched their evidence a all. If the defence evidence were to be believed, at the material time, the appellant was in police uniform patrolling the Railway platform and he was not wearing the pants from the pocket of which the tainted currency notes are alleged to have been recovered. According to the appellant these pants were hanging on a peg in his room. Therefore, the possibility of the tainted notes having been implanted, who appears to us a person with wit more and scruples less than the ordinary, cannot be ruled out - Appeal allowed

JUDGMENT

SARKARIA, J.:— This appeal by special leave is directed against a judgment of the High Court of Delhi upholding the conviction and sentence of the appellant under Sec. 5 (2) read with Sec. 5 (1) (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and Section 161, Penal Code. The facts are these:

2. On 16-1-1970, Ramesh alias Kaka (PW 1), Mst. Maya (PW 2) and Jayna (PW 8) went to the Railway Station to receive one Mst. Mumtaz, who was expected from Bombay by 1.45 p.m. train. Finding them loitering there, a constable of the Railway police took them to the appellant at the Railway Police Post where he was posted as an Assistant Sub-Inspector. The appellant gave a beating to Ramesh and demanded an explanation as to why they had come to the Railway Station. Ramesh said that they had come to receive one Mst. Mumtaz, who was expected from Bombay by train at about 1.45 P.M.The appellant questioned if Mumtaz was being brought to Delhi for prostitution. Ramesh and his companions refuted the insinuation and informed the appellant that Mumtaz was a dancing girl and not a prostitute. The appellant then demanded a bribe of Rs. 100/- from Ramesh and party, warning that in the event of non-payment, they would be implicated in some case. Ramesh paid Rs. 30/- there and then to the appellant. The latter insisted that they would not be released unless they paid the balance of Rs. 70/-. On the suggestion of the women, the appellant detained Ramesh but let off the women with the direction to send the balance of Rs. 70/-. Mst. Maya and Mst. Jayna returned to their residence on G. B. Road and informed Dal Chand (PW 7) all about the incident. Mst. Maya then handed over Rs. 70/- to Dal Chand for securing the release of Ramesh. Dal Chand, instead, went to the office of the Anti-Corruption Police where Inspector Paras Nath recorded his statement, Ex. PW 3/A. The Inspector organized a raiding party. He summoned Surinder Nath (PW 3) and Sohan Pal Singh (PW 4), two clerks from the Sales-tax Office. The recorded statement of Dal Chand was then read out to Dal Chand, and was admitted to be correct by him in the presence and hearing of the panch witnesses. Dal Chand then produced seven currency notes of the denomination of its. 10/- each. The Inspector treated those notes with phenolphthalein powder. He demonstrated to the witnesses how the fingers of a person touching a note treated with such powder would turn violet when dipped in a solution of sodium carbonate. The treated notes were then returned to Dal Chand with the direction that he should hand over the same to the appellants. 297 on demand. The Panch witnesses were instructed to keep close to Dal Chand to witness the passing of the tainted notes. The raiding party headed by Inspector Paras Nath including Dal Chand and the panch witnesses, then reached New Delhi Railway Station at about 5.25 p.m. Dal Chand and Sohan Pal Singh were directed to go ahead, while the rest of the party took up positions nearby. Dal Chand and his companions found the appellant talking to some person just outside the Police Post. After a couple of minutes when the appellant was free from that talk, and was alone, Dal Chand approached him and said that he was the brother of Ramesh (PW 1) and had been sent by the women to pay him Rupees 70/- for getting Ramesh released.The appellant first demanded Rupees 100/- but later received .Rs. 70/- from Dal Chand and put the currency notes in the left-side pocket of his pants which he was then wearing. The appellant then told Dal Chand to go away, and assured the latter that Ramesh would be released. The appellant then went into his room in the Police Post. Inspector Paras Nath and party followed the appellant into the room. Inside, they found him sitting on a cot and Ramesh, PW, squatting on the floor. The Inspector disclosed his identity and accused the appellant of having received a bribe. The appellant kept mum. The Inspector then recovered the currency notes, Exs. P1 to P7, from the pocke










































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top