CRL.A. Nos. 192 of 2008 & 348 of 2013 Page 1 of 19

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

CRL.A. 192 of 2008

Reserved on: August 28, 2014

Decision on: September 12, 2014

NAVAL KISHORE

..... Appellant

Through:

Mr. Abhinav Bajaj and

Mr. Bharat Sharma, Advocates.

Versus

STATE

..... Respondent

Through:

Mr. Rajat Katyal, APP.

CRL.A. 348 of 2013

AMAN BHATIA

..... Appellant

Through:

Mr.

S.K.

Rungta,

Senior

Advocate with Mr. Prashant

Singh and Ms. Meena Dua,

Advocates.

versus

STATE (GNCT OF DELHI)

..... Respondent

Through:

Ms. Isha Khanna, APP.

CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR

JUDGMENT

12.09.2014

1. Both these criminal appeals raise an interesting question of law: Is a

stamp vendor a public servant for the purposes of the Prevention of

Corruption Act, 1988 („PC Act‟)?

2014:DHC:4606

CRL.A. Nos. 192 of 2008 & 348 of 2013 Page 2 of 19

2. Criminal Appeal No. 192 of 2008 by Naval Kishore is directed

against the judgement dated 4^th February 2008 passed by the learned

Special Judge in Complainant Case No. 21/2004 convicting the

Appellant for the offences under Sections 7 and 13(1) (d) read with

Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 ("PC Act").

The appeal is also against the order dated 5^th February 2008 whereby

for the offence under Section 7 of the PC Act, the Appellant was

sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment ("RI") for a period of 6

months along with a fine of Rs.1,000/- and in default to undergo

simple imprisonment ("SI") for a period of one month and for the

offence under Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the PC Act

he was sentenced to undergo RI for one year along with fine of

Rs.1,000/- and in default to undergo SI for a period of one month.

Both sentences were directed to run concurrently.

3. Criminal Appeal No. 348 of 2013 by Aman Bhatia is directed

against the judgement dated 30^th January 2013 passed by the learned

Special Judge in Complainant Case No. 11/2009 convicting the

Appellant for the offences under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read with

Section 13(2) of the PC Act as well as the order on sentence dated 31^st

January 2013 whereby for the offence under Section 7 of the PC Act,

the Appellant was sentenced to RI for a period of 6 months along with

a fine of Rs.1,000/- and in default to undergo SI for one month and for

the offence under Section 13(1)(d) of the PC Act he was sentenced to

undergo RI for one year along with a fine of Rs.1,000/- and in default

to undergo SI for one month. Both sentences were directed to run

concurrently.

2014:DHC:4606

CRL.A. Nos. 192 of 2008 & 348 of 2013 Page 3 of 19

4. What is common in both the appeals is that both the Appellants

were at the relevant time licensed Stamp vendors. While Appellant

Naval Kishore was holding licence No. 226 and was authorised to sell

stamps and court fees at Karkardooma Courts complex, Appellant

Aman Bhatia held licence No. 594 and was selling stamp papers at the

office of the Sub-Registrar Janakpuri, Delhi.

Crl. A. No. 192 of 2008 by Naval Kishore

5. The allegations in both cases were also similar. As far as Naval

Kishore was concerned, the allegation was that on 17^th October 2003,

the complainant Jai Singh (PW-5), who was working as a Court clerk

with an Advocate, gave a complaint (Ex.PW/5A) to the Anti

Corruption Branch ("ACB") which was recorded by Inspector Vipin

Kumar Nair (Raid officer) (PW-8) in the presence of the panch

witness Kumar Sambhav (PW-6) to the effect that the Appellant

Naval Kishore was charging Rs.10/-, Rs.5/- and Rs.2/- in excess for

stamp papers of denominations Rs.100/-, Rs.50/- and Rs.10/-

respectively. PW-5 gave two Government currency notes ("GC

notes"), one of Rs.100/- and the oth