Prosecution must prove demand, acceptance, and recovery of bribe; failure to establish these elements results in acquittal.

JUDGMENT :

S.K. SAHOO, J.

The appellant Mahendra Maharana faced trial in the Court of learned Special Judge (C.B.I.), Bhubaneswar in T.R. No.14 of 2006 for offences punishable under section 7 and section 13(2) read with section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereafter ‘1988 Act’) on the accusation that he being a public servant functioning as UDC in the Office of the Regional Labour Commissioner (Central), Sector-5, Rourkela on 22.03.2006 at Laxmi Market, Sector-4, Rourkela demanded and accepted bribe of Rs.2,000/- (rupees two thousand) from Basudev Mohanty (P.W.4) as gratification other than legal remuneration for processing the file for issuing the gratuity sanction order to the M/s. Essel Mining and Industries Limited Jilling (hereafter ‘the Company’).

The learned trial Court vide impugned judgment and order dated 29.06.2011 found the appellant guilty of the offences charged and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- (rupees one thousand), in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month more for the offence under section 7 of the 1988 Act and to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- (rupees five thousand), in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months more for the offence under section 13(2) read with section 13(1)(d) of the 1988 Act and both the sentences were directed to run concurrently.

2. The first information report (Ext.12) was lodged by P.W.4 Basudev Mohanty on 21.03.2006 at C.B.I. Rourkela branch office wherein it is stated that he was working in the Company and when he was removed from service in an illegal manner, he filed a case before the Controlling Authority -cum-

Assistant Labour Commissioner (Central), Bhubaneswar and on 17.02.2006, final order was passed for payment of Rs.50,005/- (rupees fifty thousand five) in his favour within a period of one month from the date of order. P.W.4 approached the appellant, who was the UDC in the Office of the Assistant Labour Commissioner, Sector-5, Rourkela for processing the file for issuing the gratuity sanction order to the Company.

It is the further prosecution case as per the first information report that on 21.03.2006 in his office, the appellant demanded illegal gratification of Rs.2,000/- (rupees two thousand) from P.W.4 which was to be paid by 22.03.2006. Since P.W.4 was not willing to pay the bribe, he lodged the first information report wherein he mentioned that the appellant told him to pay bribe of Rs.2,000/- (rupees two thousand) on 22.03.2006 at Laxmi Market, Sector-4 near a hotel and he has to make telephonic communication with the appellant in that respect.

On the basis of such report, the Superintendent of Police, C.B.I., Bhubaneswar registered a case under section 7 of the 1988 Act against the appellant and entrusted the case to Shri D.K. Kabi (P.W.7), Inspector, C.B.I., Rourkela Unit for investigation.

P.W.7 constituted a trap team and they appeared at the C.B.I. Office, Rourkela on 22.03.2006 at about 2.30 p.m. and P.W.4 also came to the C.B.I. Office with four five hundred rupees currency notes as per the instruction given earlier by P.W.7. The numbers of the notes were noted down in a paper, which was signed by the witnesses. The notes were treated with phenolphthalein powder and P.W.6 G.V. Srinivas was asked to handle the same and his hand wash turned pink when it was taken in sodium carbonate solution an