Panchanamas are not statements made to police officers and are not hit by section 162 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

TULZAPURKAR J- The question that has been referred to the Full Bench runs as follows:

"Whether the documents like Ex. 28, being the statement of the complainant recorded by Police Sub-Inspector Sarakwas (P. W. 13), Ex. 33 being the first panchanama made in the presence of panchas and signed by the panchas, Ex. 34 being the second panchanama prepared under the signature of the; panchas by Police Sub-Inspector Sarakwas (P. W. 13) after the trap was successful and Ex. 35 being panchanama prepared by Police Sub-Inspector Sarakwas (P. W. 13) are in any manner hit by the provisions of section 162 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and if at all to what extent and whether they can be entirely excluded as inadmissible?"

2. The question framed arises in these circumstances: In the year 1967 one Vidyadhar Bakare was appointed an Arbitrator for Town Planning Scheme Nos. I and III and the locality known as Parvati was included in Scheme No. III. The Scheme was prepared by Poona Municipality in the year 1934 and thereafter the draft scheme was approved in the year 1943. Various arbitrators were appointed but ultimately it was Vidyadhar Bakare who was incharge of implementation of the Scheme. I Original accused No.1 Ramakant Vishnu Brahme (since acquitted) was working as Assistant Engineer while original accused No.2 Vishnu Krishna Belurkar (appellant No.1 in the appeal) and original accused No.3 Shriram Balkrishna Vaidya (appellant No.2 in the appeal) were respectively working as a Junior A~5istant and a Draughtsman in the Office of the Arbitrator. In the concerned locality one Omprakash Mundada the complainant owned a plot bealing survey No. 250-B which was included in the reservation made for a garden, called Peshwe Park, in the Scheme. It appears that the complainant along with a couple of other plot holders were making attempts to get their plots excluded from the reservation made in the Town Planning Scheme and according to the prosecution for showing this favour the accused had conspired to obtain illegal gratification from the plotholders. The prosecution case was that initially in January 1970 original accused No. I had promised to exclude the plots from reservation and had demanded reward in the sum of Rs. 5000 but later on complainant Omprakash accompanied by one Mehtabsingh, another plot-holder, jointly met accused No.1 as well as accused No.2 when it was agreed that Rs. 4000 should be paid for the work, Rs. 2000 by each of the plot-holders; it was further agreed that out of this amount of Rs. 2000 payable by each Rs. 500 were to be paid in advance and Rs. 1500 after the work was done. 'The last meeting which complainant Omprakash had with accused No.2 was on February 16, 1970 and on this occasion the complainant is said to have told accused No.2 that he would pay the money within two or three days. The complainant then decided to trap the persons demanding such bribe and therefore on February 18, 1970 he approached the Anti-Corruption Police and he lodged a complaint with Police Sub-Inspector Sarakwas alleging that illegal gratification to the tune of Rs.2000 was being demanded from him by accused Nos. 1 and 2 for exclusion. of hi6 plot from reservation that was made for the garden in the scheme and that he was going to pay Rs.500 being the first instalment of the bribe to accused No.2 in the latter's office and that therefore necessary action be taken. This complaint was produced at the trial at exh. 28. On the very day Police Sub-Inspector Sarakwas decided to 'lay a trap and with that end in view called two panchas and in their presence the complainant was made to repeat the entire story to the two panchas, demonstration of application of the anthracene powder to the currency notes produced by the complainant was given under ultra violet lamp and instructions were issued to the complainant not to part with the amount unless demand was made by accused No.2; a panchanama recording all that transpired was drawn by Police