2023 Supreme(Pat) 837
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
SHAILENDRA SINGH, J.
Criminal Appeal (SJ) No.156 of 2013
(9.10.2023)
Dr. Binod Kumar Verma @ Vinod Kumar Verma ... Appellant
vs.
State of Bihar ... Respondents
For the Appellant : M/s Rajiv Kumar Verma, Sr. Adv., Rajneesh, Meeta Sinha.
For the Respondent: Mr. Rana Vikram Singh, Spl. PP Vigilance.
Headnote:
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973–Section 197 & Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988–Section 7, 13(2) r/w Section 13 (1) (d)–Appellant, who was posted as Medical Officer-In-Charge, Primary Health Centre, Kako, Jehanabad, alleged to have accepted a bribe of Rs. 3,500/- from one Dr. Shailendra Kumar, the In-charge Medical Officer at Police Hospital, Nawada for releasing his salary–the appellant was a public servant at the time of recovery of bribe money from his possession and he could be removed from his post only with the permission of the State Government, so a prosecution sanction was required to prosecute the appellant for the alleged offences of P.C. Act before initiating the trial of the appellant–but the prosecution sanction was initially issued under Section 197 of Cr.P.C. on 2/1/2007 and thereafter the correct and valid prosecution sanction was issued on 28.06.2007 by the Bihar Government but the same was sent to the trial court on 17.05.2011 while the Trial Court took the cognizance–of the alleged offences of the P.C. Act on 23.08.2007 before the receipt of the modified valid prosecution sanction and between 23.08.2007, the date on which the cognizance was taken, and 02.07.2011, the date on which the modified sanction was received in the trial court, three P.Ws. had been examined–hence, the Trial Court took the cognizance of the alleged offences of the P.C. Act against the appellant in the absence of a valid prosecution sanction and thereafter the appellant was subjected to trial and the three witnesses were examined by the prosecution in the absence of valid prosecution sanction–as such, the entire proceeding before the Trial Court cannot be deemed to be legal–accordingly, the important part of the appellant's trial which was done in absence of a valid prosecution sanction can be deemed to be not legal and the said circumstances entitled the appellant to be acquitted of the alleged offences of P.C. Act, 1988–appellant given benefit of doubt–Conviction set aside–appeal allowed. (Paras 14 & 15)
2010 (4) PLJR 115–Referred.
Shailendra Singh, J. – Heard the parties.
2. The instant appeal has been filed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 07.02.2013 passed by the learned Special Judge, Vigilance, Trap, Patna in Special Case No. 11 of 2006/04 of 2009, arising out of Vigilance P.S. Case No. 13 of 2006 instituted for the offences punishable under Sections 7, 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as “PC Act”) for which the appellant has been held guilty and convicted and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 2 years with fine of Rs. 5,000/- for the offence punishable under Section 7 of the PC Act and S.I. for one month in case of default of payment of fine by the impugned judgment and the appellant has further been convicted and sentenced for the offence punishable under Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the P.C. Act to undergo R.I. for one and half year with fine of Rs. 5,000/- and in case of default of payment of fine further for one month of S.I. and both the sentences have been ordered to run concurrently.
3. The Prosecution’s case in nutshell is that on 10.03.2006 one Dr. Shailendra Kumar, the In-charge Medical Officer at Police Hospital, Nawada, made a complaint to the effect that he was earlier posted as Medical Officer at Primary Health Centre, Kako, Jehanabad from where he was relieved on 31.07.2015 but his salary concerned to the said posting place was due since December, 2004 and after his transfer, when he demanded to release the arrears of his salary from the appellant who was posted as Medical Officer In-charge, Primary Health Centre, Kako, Jehanabad, but the appellant demanded the bribe to release his arrears of salary. When the complainant expressed his inability to pay the bribe then the appellant suggested him that he would clear his dues of two months so that he would pay him the demanded money and thereafter the rest part of the arrears would be cleared as per appellant’s statement. Thereafter the complainant approached the Civil Surgeon, Jehanabad several times and made complaint against the appellant in writing but no action was taken against him and he also filed complaint to the District Magistrate, Jehanabad and informed the Health Commissioner vide e-mail about the wrong of the appellant but despite of all said efforts he did not get the arrears of his salary and even did not receive his last pay slip concerned to his previous posting place i.e. Primary Health Centre, Kako, Jehanabad. Thereafter, on the complaint of the complainant the Vigilance Department deputed Sub-Inspector namely, Prabhu Dayal (P.W.2) for verification of the allegation and on his confirmation the FIR was lodged on 16.03.2016 against the appellant and a trap team was constituted under the leadership of Md. Khairuddin Ansari (P.W.1), Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vigilance, Patna, after that, on 16.03.2006 Pre-Trap Memorandum was prepared at the Vigilance Headquarter and the Trap Team rushed to the residence of the appellant situated at Chandmari Road, Patna on 17.03.2006 between 9:00 A.M. and 10:30 A.M., from where the appellant was arrested while accepting a sum of Rs. 3,500/- as a part of the demanded bribe from the complainant and thereafter the appellant was brought to the Vigilance Office and in presence of two independent witnesses the recovery of the said amount was made from the left pocket of the appellant’s shirt.
4. As per further allegation, after recovery of the bribe amount, the fingers of both the hands and upper left pocket of the shirt of the appellant were washed in the solution of Sodium Carbonate and then the colour of solution turned into pink from white and the said solution which was used in washing was filled in three separate glass Jars and after completing the above necessary formalities the post trap memorandum was prepared.
5. The appellant’s case was investigated by the police Inspector Mr. Shashi Shekhar Jha, who submitted chargesheet aga