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

1993 Supreme(P&H) 415

PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
R.K.Nehru, J.
Gurcharan Singh
Versus
State Of Haryana
Criminal Application No. 516SB of 1986,
Decided On : JUNE 4, 1993

The evidence of the complainant and the shadow witness, in the absence of independent corroboration, is not sufficient to prove the demand and acceptance of bribe by the accused.

Headnote:

PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION ACT - SECTION 5(1)(D) AND 5(2) - SECTION 161, IPC - DEMAND AND ACCEPTANCE OF BRIBE - CORROBORATION OF EVIDENCE - INDEPENDENT WITNESS - PRESUMPTION UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE ACT - REBUTTAL.

Fact of the Case:

The appellant, a Patwari, was convicted for demanding and accepting a bribe of Rs. 300 from the complainant for making necessary entries in the mutation register. The prosecution relied on the evidence of the complainant, a shadow witness, a government veterinary surgeon, and a vigilance inspector.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the evidence of the complainant and the shadow witness was not independent and required corroboration. The court also found discrepancies in the evidence of the prosecution witnesses, which created doubt about the truthfulness of the prosecution case.

Issues: 1. Whether the evidence of the complainant and the shadow witness was sufficient to prove the demand and acceptance of bribe by the appellant. 2. Whether the discrepancies in the evidence of the prosecution witnesses were material and affected the reliability of the prosecution case.

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the evidence of the complainant and the shadow witness was not sufficient to prove the demand and acceptance of bribe by the appellant. The court observed that the complainant was an interested witness and the shadow witness was not an independent witness. 2. The court held that the discrepancies in the evidence of the prosecution witnesses were material and affected the reliability of the prosecution case. The court observed that the discrepancies related to the number of persons present at the time of the raid, the place where the handwash and shirtwash of the appellant were sealed and seized, and the treatment of the tainted currency notes with phenolphthalein powder.

Final Decision: The court allowed the appeal, set aside the conviction and sentence imposed on the appellant, and acquitted him of the charges.

Judgment

1. This is an appeal against. the judgment of conviction and order of sentence both dated 26/07/1986 of Special Judge, Sirsa, whereby the appellant has been convicted for offences under Section 5(1)(d] read with Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and under Section 161 of the Indian Penal Code and as a result thereof, sentenced in the following terms :

i) Under Sec. 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. : To undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and a fine of Rs. 500.00. In default of payment undergo rigorous Imprisonment for six months. ii) Under sec. 161, IPC : To undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year.

2. Both the substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

3. Thc prosecution case in nut shell is summed up thus

4. The appellant at the relevant time was posted as Patwari in village Chautala. In the month of December, 1984, complainant Ripudaman PW 8 purchased two killas of land in the name of his brother Ravi Dutt and in the month of February, 1985, he purchased another four killas I kanal of land, from Gordhan, a resident of village Chautala, under registered sale deeds exhibited as PI and P2 respectively. Ripudaman handed over these sale deeds to the appellant for making necessary entries in the mutation register. However, despite repeated requests made by Ripudaman, the appellant did not enter the necessary mutations for a period of six months and ultimately, he demanded Rs. 400/ - as illegal gratification from him for doing the job. The bargain was settled at Rs.300.00 Ripudaman, however, did not want to pay any bribe to the appellant. As such, on 9/07/1985, Ripudaman along with Nazir Singh PW 9 went to Sirsa. There he met Vigilance Inspector Amrik Singh PW 11 and informed him about the demand of illegal gratification made by the appellant. The Vigilance Inspector thereupon got three currency notes of the demonination of Rs. 100.00 each (Ex.P3 to Ex.P5) from Ripudaman PW 8 noted down their serial numbers and seized them under memo Ex.PF attested by Ripudaman PW 8 and Nazir Singh PW 9. The Inspector gave a demonstration before him by mixing phenolphthalein powder in a sulution of sodium carbonate as a result of which the solution turned pink. He also treated the currency notes, Ex.P3 to Ex.P5 with phenolphthalein powder and handed them over to Ripudaman PW 8 under memo Ex.PH. He recorded the statement Ex.PA of Ripudaman and sent it under his endorsement Ex.PA/2 to Police Station, State Vigilance Bureau, Hisar Division, Hisar where the case was registered under First Information Report Ex. PA,1.

5. The Inspector then chalked out a plan to trap the appellant while accepting bribe. As per the plan Ripudaman was assigned the role of a decoy and was directed to go to the appellant in the Patwar-khana in village Chautala and to pass on the tainted money to him on his demand; Nazir Singh PW 9 was assigned the role of a shadow winess with the direction to take his position near the door of the patwar-khana and to give a signal by placing his hand on his head to the Inspector and other members of the raiding party standing outside at a short distance, near a tea shop, after the tainted money had been passed on to the appellant,

6. After the plan of laying the trap was finalised, the raiding. party headed by Inspector Amrik Singh PW 11 went to Chautala where he joined Dr. Om Parkash. Government Veterinary Surgeon PW 10 also in the raiding party and informed him about the plan to lay the trap. Thereafter, the raiding party proceeded to the patwar-khana. As per the plan, Ripudaman PW 8 went inside the patwar-khana. The shadow witness Nazir Singh PW 9 took his position at the door of the patwar-khana while the Inspector along with other members of the raiding party stood near a tea stall situated at a short distance from the patwar-khana. After 2/3 minutes, Nazir Singh PW 9 gave the apponited signal to the other members of the raiding party waiting near the tea stall, by placing his hand























Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

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