Back
2018 Supreme(Mad) 3309
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
G. JAYACHANDRAN, J.
Pandian - Appellant
Versus
State Rep, By Inspector of Police, CBI, ACB, Chennai - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 257 of 2010
Decided On : 23-10-2018
A. Ramesh, Adv., N. Mohideen Baskar, Adv., N. Nagendran, Adv.
The judgment establishes that evidence of demand, acceptance, and recovery of illegal gratification, along with the accused's attempt to drop proceedings after receiving the bribe, suffices to establish guilt under the Prevention of Corruption Act.
Headnote:
Corruption - Public Servant - Prevention of Corruption Act - Section 7, Section 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d)
Fact of the Case:
The appellant, a public servant, was accused of demanding and accepting illegal gratification from a firm for not pursuing an enquiry about their failure to contribute to the Provident Fund prior to 2007. The prosecution presented evidence of the demand, acceptance, and recovery of the bribe money, as well as the accused's attempt to drop proceedings against the firm after receiving the bribe.
Finding of the Court:
The trial court found the accused guilty under Section 7 and Section 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act based on the testimony of witnesses, evidence of demand and acceptance of the bribe, and the accused's attempt to drop proceedings against the firm after receiving the bribe.
Issues: The key issues revolved around the demand and acceptance of the bribe, contradictions in witness testimonies, and the accused's attempt to drop proceedings against the firm after receiving the bribe.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the evidence presented by the prosecution, including the demand, acceptance, and recovery of the bribe money, as well as the accused's attempt to drop proceedings against the firm after receiving the bribe, was sufficient to establish the guilt of the accused under the relevant sections of the Prevention of Corruption Act.
Final Decision: The Criminal Appeal was dismissed, and the judgment of the trial court was confirmed, directing the accused to undergo the remaining period of the sentence.
G. JAYACHANDRAN, J.
1. The appellant/sole accused D.Pandian a public servant working as Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner (A.P.F.C.,) in Sub-Regional Office of Provident Fund, Trichy since October 2005. M/s.Arasu Auto is a Partnership Firm functioning at Tanjore having branches at various towns in and around Tanjore. They were also carrying on other businesses like Jewellery, Cinema Theatre, Educational Industries, etc.
2. The Management of M/s.Arasu Auto came under the scanner of Provident Fund Department for understating its employees strength and evasion of Provident Fund (PF) contribution. On 01/08/2007, the then Regional Provident Fund Commissioner Mr.Brahma Nair along with the Enforcement Officers Mr. Shanmugavel and Mr. Kanagu inspected the premises of M/s. Arasu Auto at Tanjore and they sought for details about the employees. At the request of its partner Mr.Murugan/ PW.6, time was given for them to furnish the list of employees and to get their names enlisted under the PF scheme.
3. Pursuant to the inspection, Sri Lakshmi Theatre, Kumbakonam owned by one of the partners of M/s.Arasu Auto was attached for non-payment of PF due of Rs. 21,849.50/-. Mr. Senthil Kumar, Managing Partner of Arasu Jewellery, Kumbakonam was prosecuted for violation of PF Act and he pleaded guilty and paid fine of Rs. 3,000/- in STC No.2763/2007 on 14/12/2007 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate Court, Kumbakonam. For the period covering January 2007 to January 2008, a sum of Rs. 7,50,000/- was recovered from M/s.Arasu Auto. ( Rs. 1,00,000/- as on 15/12/2007 and Rs. 6,50,000/- as on 20/02/2008).
4. On 11/03/2008, R.Suresh Kumar, Accounts Manager of M/s.Arasu Autos, Thanjore gave a written complaint to the Superintendent of Police, CBI/ ACB Chennai alleging demand of illegal gratification of Rs. 4,00,000/- (Rupees Four lakhs only) by Pandian, A.P.F.C., the appellant/accused herein. According to the complaint, the accused Pandian, pursuant to the inspection issued show cause notice to M/s. Arasu Auto alleging non-enrollment of eligible employees in the Employee Provident Fund(EPF) Scheme. He asked to pay the EPF dues for the current year and the dues relating to previous years can be looked later. As advised by him, the said firm remitted the EPF dues for the year 2007-08. Thereafter, when he met Pandian at his office on 10/03/2008, he informed that based on the dues paid for the year 2007-08, they are liable to pay further sum of Rs. 50,00,000/- (Rupees Fifty Lakhs only) for the previous years as arrears and penalty. To waive the previous dues, he demanded, Rs. 4,00,000/- (Rupees Four Lakhs) as bribe or else he will initiate further legal proceedings to recover the EPF dues with penalty.
5. The complaint of R.Suresh kumar(PW.1) was registered after making discreet enquiry about the credentials of the complainant as well as the accused by Thiru.Anandakrishnan, Inspector of Police, CBI. Two independent witnesses namely R.Mohanraj, Officer, Canara Bank, Tiruchy and Mr.D.Herbert, Assistant Administrative Officer, L.I.C., Tiruchy were called to Saratha Lodge, Tiruchy. In their presence and Others, the significance of phenolpthalein sodium corbonate test was demostrated. The currency numbers were noted and it was smeared with phenolpthalein powder. The tainted currency notes of Rs. 4,00,000/- were kept in the office bag of R.Suresh Kumar, PW.1 (de facto complainant). Entrustment mahazar detailing out the event was drawn and all the witnesses signed in it. The de facto complainant was instructed not to touch the currency notes unless the accused Pandian demands bribe. The trap team along with the de facto complainant proceeded to the PF Office at Madurai Road, Tiruchy. The de facto complainant was instructed to give signal to the trap team, if the accused receive the money.
6. At about 12.40 hrs, the trap team reached PF office. R.Suresh kumar, PW.1/ de facto complainanant, Sekar, an employee of M/s. Arasu Auto and the independent witness Mohan
