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

2012 Supreme(Jhk) 431

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND
D.N. UPADHYAY, J.
Parmeshswar Prasad Jaiswal - Appellant
Versus
The State of Jharkhand through C.B.I.- Respondent
Criminal Appeal (SJ) No. 1406 of 2007
Decided on: 23.3.2012

Advocates appeared:
For the Appellant:Mr. A.K. Kashyap, Sr. Advocate Mr. Ravi Prakash, Advocate
For the Respondent: Md. Mokhtar Khan, C.B.I.

Headnote:A) Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947-Section 5(2) r/w Section 5(1)(d):- Conviction for demanding bribe for allowing the grant of overtime was set aside as the complainant had already received the overtime even two days prior to the complainant without the requirement of any obligation from the accused and the complaint and trap was only made to fill up the procedural formality. (Para 11)

JUDGMENT

D.N. Upadhyay, J.- This criminal appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 10.10.2007 and 11.10.2007 respectively passed by Sri P.C. Agrawal, Additional District & Sessions Judge-VIII-cum-Spl. Judge, C.B.I., Dhanbad in R.C. Case No.15A/1988(D) whereby and whereunder the sole appellant Parmeshswar Prasad Jaiswal has been held guilty for the offences punishable u/s 5(2) r/w5(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 corresponding to Section 13(2) r/w 13(1) (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and sentenced to undergo R.I. for three years with fine of Rs.500/-and in default in depositing fine, further imprisonment for two months R.I. However, the period undergone during the trial was directed to be set off.

2. The prosecution case, as it appears from the complaint of one Sri Kedar Nath Pandey, reported to S.P., C.B.I., Dhanbad on 01.08.1988 is that at the relevant point of time complainant was Pay Loader Operator, employed in East Basuria Colliery Area-VI, BCCL, Dhanbad and was working under the charge of the accused/appellant namely Parmeshwar Prasad Jaiswal. It is further stated that appellant was Sr. Assistant Colliery Manager and was the incharge of Tipper Section and it was his duty to allow duties to the operators and drivers of the Tipper Section of East Basuria Colliery and to allow overtime to the drivers, Pay Loader Operators. Further, according to the complainant, accused/appellant, as an incharge of tipper section used to demand Rs.100/-every month for allowing overtime to Pay Loader Operator and when the complainant approached him on 29.07.1988 for allowing overtime, accused/appellant demanded Rs.200/-for two months and after request made by the complainant, he agreed to accept Rs.150/-and balance Rs.50/-subsequently. According to the complainant, as he was not willing to pay illegal gratification to accused/appellant, he lodged a written complaint on 01.08.1988 to the Superintendent of Police, C.B.I., Dhanbad for taking necessary legal action.

3. According to the prosecution, the said complaint was got verified by one C.B.I. Officer and the allegation, made therein was found to be genuine and thereafter a regular case was registered bearing R.C. Case No.15A/88-D dated 01.08.1988 and the investigation was taken up by Sri A.K. Asthana, Inspector of Police, C.B.I., copy of the F.I.R. was forwarded to the Court of Spl. Judge, C.B.I., Dhanbad under the signature of S.P., C.B.I., Dhanbad.

4. Further, according to the prosecution, during the course of investigation a successful trap was led by a team of officials of SPE, C.B.I., Dhanbad in active participation of two independent witnesses, namely, Sri L.N. Dibakar and Sri R.C. Saha, U.G.C. and Stenographer respectively in the office of the Regional Labour Commissioner, Dhanbad. The complainant was also present with the team. As per prosecution, the team assembled in the office of S.P. S.P.E., C.B.I., Dhanbad on 02.08.1988 and the pre-trap formalities were explained in details and a practical demonstration was also held in order to make the process of laying of trap clear to the persons present. During this the complainant replied to the question put by the witnesses by which genuineness of the allegations, made by the complainant was found to be satisfied. According to the prosecution, after completing the above formalities, the complainant produced three G.C. Notes of Rs.50/-each being number 7 DD-A-845911, 8AH-187040 and 9 BA-672517. These currency notes were treated with phenolphthelein powder and pre-trap formalities were incorporated in the preliminary memorandum which has been signed by the members of raiding party two witnesses and the complainant. The hand wash of Sri L.N. Diwakar obtained during the demonstration and the piece of papers treated with phenolphthelein powder, which was used during the demonstration, were preserved and sealed. Necessary instructions were given to the members of raiding p









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