$~

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on: 8^th November, 2024 Pronounced on:12^th March, 2025 + CRL.A. 638/2014 MEGHRAJ SINGH .....Appellant Through: Mr. Sushil Bajaj, Mr. Bhavook Chauhan, Mr. Tushar Yadav & Mr.

Aadithya Aravindh, Advocates.

versus CBI .....Respondent Through: Mr. Atul Guleria, SPP, Mr. Pankaj Kumar with Mr. Aryan Rakesh, Advocates for CBI.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT SHARMA

JUDGMENT

AMIT SHARMA, J.

1. The present appeal under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, (for short, ‘CrPC’) has been filed assailing the impugned judgment of conviction and order on sentence dated 03.05.2014 and 12.05.2014 respectively, passed by learned Special Judge, P.C. Act (CBI-09), Central District Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi, whereby, the present appellant has been convicted in Corruption Case No. 89/2011 arising out of RC No. 48(A)/04, under Section 7 and Section 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, (for short, ‘PC Act’), registered with CBI.

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Page 1 of 31

2. Vide the aforesaid judgment of conviction and order on sentence, the appellant has been convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 7 and 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the PC Act. The appellant was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for a period of 3 years alongwith a fine of Rs. 25,000/- for the offence punishable under Section 7 of the PC Act and also sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for a period of 3 years alongwith a fine of Rs. 25,000/- for the offence punishable under Section 13(2) read with Section

13(1)(d) of the Act.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

3. Brief facts, necessary for the disposal of the present appeal, are as follows:

i) The present appellant was posted as Head Constable with the Excise Department of GNCT of Delhi during the year 2003. Another co-accused person, Ram Kumar, who was posted as Constable with the same Department and was jointly tried alongwith the present appellant, was acquitted by the learned Trial Court.

ii) During 2002 and 2003, one Chetan Prakash s/o Babu Lal (hereinafter referred to as, ‘complainant/PW-4’) had captured several personnel of Delhi Police and Excise Department in a video taking money from bootleggers in the area under the jurisdiction of Police Station Uttam Nagar and the areas adjacent to it, in order to expose their corrupt practices. He had, then, filed a writ petition, i.e., W.P.(CRL) 367/2004, before this Court stating that he had recorded videos of police personnel and other government officials taking bribe from bootleggers and thereby seeking protection and direction for Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Page 2 of 31 investigation by CBI in this regard. Vide order dated 04.10.2004, a Coordinate Bench of this Court directed the CBI to investigate the present matter. Accordingly, in compliance of the order passed by this Court three separate Regular Cases were registered with CBI, ACB, New Delhi vide FIR Nos. RC DAI 2004 A 0048; RC DAI 2004 A 0049; RC DAI 2004 A 50.

iii) The proceedings in the present case arises out of RC DAI 2004 A 0048 as this RC is in respect of the incidents falling within the territorial jurisdiction of PS Uttam Nagar.

iv) The complainant/PW-4 had provided one VHS video cassette and five HI-8 (small) video cassettes to CBI through High Court which then, formed the basis of the present investigation. One of the places where complainant captured the video films, in a clandestine manner, was in front of the residential premises of Shri Jasbir Sansi and his wife, Smt. Bina Sansi, who allegedly used to sell liquor bottles illegally from the premises of their residence. Several cases under the Excise Act were also stated to have been registered against the said Sansi couple at PS Uttam Nagar.

v) During the course of investigation, it was revealed that video films in question were prepared by the complainant/PW-4 on HI-8 video cassettes and he had copied its contents in VHS video cassette. Five such