JUDGMENT

BHAGWATI, J.:— This appeal by special leave is directed against an order passed by the High Court of Rajasthan confirming the conviction and sentence recorded against the appellant by the special Judge. Bharatpur, under Section 165-A of the Indian Penal Code.

2. The incident giving rise to the prosecution against the appellant took place within an area in the State of Rajasthan lying within a 10 mile belt along the border of that State adjoining the State of Uttar Pradesh. There was at the material time in force. Rajasthan Foodgrains (Restrictions on Border Movements) Order, 1959 which imposed a ban on transport of foodgrains to any place within the area of this 10 mile belt from any place outside that area except under and in accordance with a permit issued by the State Government or by any officer authorised by the Government in this behalf. This order was issued under Section 3 of Essential Commodities Act, 1955, and any contravention of this provision was punishable under Section 7 of that Act. The prosecution case was that on the night between 13th and 14th November 1966, Head Constable Ram Singh and four other police constables viz., Kishan Singh, Fateh Singh, Hira Lal and Sunder Singh, 986 all attached to police station Sewar, were on patrolling duty in the area of the 10 mile belt with a view to preventing smuggling of grains from Rajasthan to Uttar Pradesh. They were at a place about 5 or 6 furlongs away from the border on the way leading from Village Bilothi in Rajasthan to Village Nagla Khoobi in Uttar Pradesh. When at about 5 a. m. in the morning of 14th November 1966 they noticed that a cart driven by two buffaloes was coming from the side of Bilothi and proceeding in the direction of Nagla Khoobi. The cart was loaded with 6 bags of gram weighing about 14 to 15 maunds. One Ram Raj was driving the cart while the appellant was sitting in the cart on the bags of gram. Head Constable Ram Singh and his companions stopped the cart and checked it and on finding that it carried six bags of gram. Head Constable Ram Singh asked the appellant to produce the permit for transport but the appellant could not produce any such permit. The appellant entreated Head Constable Ram Singh to let him go and offered to pay him a bribe of Rs. 40 or Rs. 50. Head Constable Ram Singh refused to accept the bribe whereupon the appellant took out a bundle of currency notes of Rs. 510 from the Antan of his dhoti and offered them to Head Constable Ram Singh as bribe. Head Constable Ram Singh declined to accept the bribe offered by the appellant and seized the currency notes of 510 under a seizure memo Ext. P-1 in the presence of the other four police constables. He also seized the six bags of gram found on the cart under a seizure memo Ex-P2 and arrested the appellant as well as Ram Raj who was driving the cart. He then prepared a report Ex. P-4 and sent it to the police station Sewar with police constable Hira Lal. The six bags of gram which were sized under a seizure memo Ex. P-2 were then taken to the police station and weighed there and their weight was noted down under a memo Ex. P-3. Head Constable Ram Singh also lodged a First Information Report Ex. P-5 at the police station in which he showed himself as the informant or complainant and the appellant and Ram Raj were shown to have committed an offence under Section 161 of the I. P. C. for offering Rs. 510 as bribe to him. Head Constable Ram Singh thereafter investigated the case, but it appears that sometime in the beginning of April 1967 it came to his notice that he was not authorised to do so and he thereupon forwarded the papers to the Deputy Superintendent of Police on 4th April 1967. The Deputy Superintendent of Police them re-investigated the case and ultimately filed the charge-sheet against the appellant and Ram Raj under Section 165A of the Indian Penal Code in the Court of the special Judge, Bharatpur.

3. The common defence of the appellant and Ram Raj was that the appe