Page 1

JUDGMENT

REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.2271 of 2011

Phula Singh

…..Appellant

Versus

State of Himachal Pradesh

….. Respondent

JUDGMENT

Dr. B.S. CHAUHAN, J.

l.

This appeal has been preferred against the impugned judgment

and order dated 24.8.2011/7.9.2011, passed by the High Court of

Himachal Pradesh at Shimla in Criminal Appeal No.358 of 2009

reversing the judgment and order dated 19.2.2009, passed by Ld.

Special Judge, Hamirpur in Corruption Case No.1 of 2008 acquitting

the appellant from the Charges under Sections 7 and 13(2) of the

Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the

Act’). The High Court has awarded the appellant sentence of one year

Page 2

JUDGMENT

RI and a fine of Rs.10,000/- and in default of payment of fine to

undergo further RI for a period of six months.

2.

Facts and circumstances giving rise to this appeal are:

A.

That on 20.6.2007, the appellant was working as Kanungo of

the particular area and one Vakil Chand filed a complaint against the

father of the complainant that he encroached upon the land thus, asked

for demarcation. The appellant investigated the matter and found that

one and half kanals of the land of Vikil Chand had been encroached

upon by the complainant’s father.

B.

The complainant raised the objection about this demarcation

and at that time the appellant met the complainant at village Kheri and

demanded “Chai Pani” to cancel the demarcation report. It was in

view thereof that the complainant contacted the appellant on

10.7.2007 on his mobile and the appellant demanded the bribe of

Rs.5,000/- from the complainant. The complainant Prabhat Chand

lodged an FIR with the Police Station of State Vigilance and Anti-

Corruption Department, Hamirpur alleging demand of bribe by the

appellant.

2

Page 3

JUDGMENT

C.

The appellant informed the complainant that he would visit his

residence and he should pay the said amount. In the negotiation the

deal was struck to the tune of Rs.1,000/-. The appellant came to the

residence of the complainant on 10.7.2007 and demanded the bribe. In

view of the complaint already lodged by Prabhat Chand, the trap was

laid and the appellant was arrested and after investigating the matter

the chargesheet was filed which ultimately culminated into Corruption

Case No.1 of 2008 under Sections 7 and 13(2) of the Act.

After conclusion of the trial by judgment and order dated 19.2.2009

the Ld. Sessions Judge, Hamirpur acquitted the appellant of all the

charges.

D.

Aggrieved, the State of Himachal Pradesh filed an appeal which

has been allowed vide impugned judgment and order.

Hence, this appeal.

3.

Shri D.K. Garg, learned counsel appearing for the appellant has

submitted that demarcation had already been made and the report had

been submitted before the Tahsildar, therefore, there was no occasion

for the appellant to demand any amount. As the complainant’s father

had encroached upon the land of Vakil Chand to the tune of one and

3

Page 4

JUDGMENT

half kanals and the appellant had shown this fact in his report the

complainant was having the grudge against him. Therefore, he has

falsely been enroped. The High Court failed to appreciate that there

are different parameters to reverse the judgment of acquittal and in

this respect failed to apply the law laid down by this Court in a catena

of judgments. There is no evidence of demand or acceptance of the

bribe. Hence, the appeal deserves to be allowed.

4.

Per contra, Ms. Shikha Bhardwaj, learned counsel for the

respondent has opposed the appeal contending that there was

sufficient material against the appellant on the basis of which the High

Court has rightly reversed the acquittal though there was no direct

evidence of demand of bribe. The appellant visited the house of the

complainant though there was no relationship betwe