HIGH COURT OF ORISSA
B. K. PATEL, J.
Raj Kishore Lenka - Appellant
Versus
Republic of India - Respondent
CRA No. 123 of 2000
Decided on : 18th February, 2014
Not only evidence of P.W.2 cannot be held to be reliable and trustworthy due to inherent inconsistencies, suppression and contradiction but also evidence of neither P.W.3 nor P.W.4 is capable of being accepted as wholly reliable. Evidence of P.W.2 is also contradicted by evidence of P.Ws. 3 and 4. In such circumstances, prosecution is found to have failed to discharge the initial burden of proving that the appellant accepted Rs. 500/- otherwise than legal remuneration in response to demand made by him for doing any official work. Consequently, prosecution has failed to prove the existence of basic facts entitling it to avail presumption under Section 20 of P.C.Act. (Paras - 9 to 23)
2. EVIDENCE - No qualitative difference between the evidence led by the defence or by the prosecution, and such evidence cannot be rejected merely because of conjecture and surmises - While prosecution has to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, defence has only to produce evidence or probablised its defence. (Para - 21)
JUDGMENT
B.K. PATEL, J. – By the impugned judgment dated 30.05.2000 passed by learned Special Judge (CBI), Bhubaneswar in T.R.Case No.118/83 of 99/96, appellant having been found guilty of offences punishable under Section 7 and Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act (for short 'the P.C.Act'), has been sentenced to undergo R.I. for a period of one year and also to pay fine of Rs. 500/- only on each count, in default to undergo R.I. for a further period of three months.
2. Prosecution case is as follows :
The informant-decoy P.W.2 had a tea and tiffin stall near Puri Railway Station. Consequent upon removal of P.W.2's stall by the district administration in view of celebration of ensuing Nabakalebar Ratha Yatra Festival of Lord Jagannath in the year 1996, P.W.2 started his tea and tiffin stall near Zilla School, Puri. As business in that area was not good, P.W.2 desired to re-install his stall near the Railway Station. The appellant, who was working as a Sub-Inspector of Police, Railway Protection Force (S.I., RPF) Post, Puri Railway Station took breakfast in P.W.2's shop on 16.7.1996 at about 8 A.M. and told that in case P.W.2 wanted to install the tiffin stall near Puri Railway Station, he should come to him in the evening on 22.7.1996 and pay Rs. 500/-. Confronted with such demand, P.W.2 lodged FIR Ext. 2 on 22.7.1996. Inspector of CBI, Bhubaneswar P.W.5 being entrusted with the investigation, registered the case. P.W.5 procured the presence of independent witnesses P.Ws. 3 and 4 as well as some officers of the C.B.I., and in their presence read over, the FIR. P.W.2 confirmed the genuineness of allegations contained in the FIR before them. Thereafter, P.W.2 demonstrated the change of colour of phenolphthalein powder on coming in contact with sodium carbonate solution. On production of four hundred rupees and two fifty rupees currency notes by P.W.2 to be used in the trap, the currency notes were smeared with Phenolphthalein powder and handed over to P.W.2. P.W.2 kept the same in the shirt pocket. P.W.2 was instructed to give signal to the raiding party by scratching his head with his finger. P.W. 3 was instructed to accompany and follow P.W.2 at a reasonable distance in an obstructive manner so that he could overhear the conversation between P.W.2 and appellant, and see the transaction. After preparation of pre-trap memorandum Ext. 3, P.W.5 along with independent witnesses and C.B.I. officials proceeded to Puri. P.Ws. 2 and 4 went to the R.P.F. office and others took their position nearby. P.Ws. 2 and 4 came back after sometime and informed that the appellant would return from Khurda in the evening, Raiding party waited in Puri. At about 8.20 P.M., appellant was found coming towards the RPF Office from the Railway Station. P.W.2 approached and wished him and thereafter followed the appellant to the RPF Office. At about 8.30 P.M. P.W.2 came out and gave the agreed signal. On getting the signal, P.W. 2 along with C.B.I. officials and independent witnesses rushed into the RPF Office and challenged the appellant to have accepted bribe of Rs, 500/- from P.W.2. Appellant became nervous and directed the RPF personnel to interfere. Finding the situation tense, appellant was taken by the CBI officials to Puri Town Police Station where they searched the person of the appellant and recovered the tainted currency notes. P.W.5 seized the currency notes under seizure list. Ext. 4. Being compared, the numbers of seized currency notes tallied with numbers noted in the pre-trap memorandum Ext. 3. Appellant's palm and fingers being washed with sodium carbonate solution, solution became pink in colour. After observing the formalities, P.W.5 prepared post-trap memorandum Ext. 5. On completion of investigation, after obtaining sanction order of prosecution of the appellant from P.W.1, I.G. RPF, charge sheet was submitted against the appellant.
3. Appellant took the plea of denial of the allegation of demand or receipt of bribe. His sp
(2011) 6 SCC 450 : State of Kerala v. C.P.Rao … 6
2011 (II) OLR 603 : Debananda v. State … 6
AIR 1975 SC 1432 : Sita v. State of Rajasthan … 17
AIR 1979 SC 1408 : Suraj v. The State … 18
80 (1995) CLT 223 : Ram v. State … 21
SupremeToday
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.