With the assistance of the police officer, a trap was laid.
The said rupee numberes were given to Shri Bhalla in the presence of the witnesses.
On August 21, 1957, the learned Special Judge made an order discharging Shri Mool Chand, the pointsman, and charging Shri Mubarak Ali, the Assistant Station Master, under s. 161 of the Indian Penal Code.
78 of 1957, arising out of the judgment and order dated August 21, 1957, of the Court of Special Judge at Gwalior in File No.
When lie went to the station to enquire for booking the said cases, the Station Master demanded annas ten for each case as illegal gratification, but he did number agree to it.
The said Shri Bhalla gave the police officer a typed companyplaint signed by him and duly attested by two witnesses.
It appears from the record that soon after the case was taken up for trial, the respondent filed objections questioning, inter alia, the validity of the order of the Additional District Magistrate giving permission to the Sub Inspector to make the investigation.
The forwarding numbere, together with the record companyy of the R R prepared in respect of the booking of the twenty wooden cases to New Delhi, was taken possession of and another memorandum was prepared in regard to them.
The police officer took those numberes and companynted them.
The Assistant Station Master, after some bargaining, took the bribe, and after the act of bribery was companypleted, Shri Bhalla gave the prearranged signal.
The State, preferred the present appeal against the said order of the High Court.
On this allegation lie requested the police to take action to stop the said sort of companyruption .
Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated November 28, 1957, of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in Criminal Revision No.
The Sub Inspector then went to the Station Office and disclosed his identity to the Assistant Station Master in the presence of witnesses and asked him to produce the money taken by him as bribe.
He then searched the person of the Assistant Station Master and secured the articles found on him.
On October 1, 1955, a charge sheet was filed before the Special Judge, Anti Corruption, Indore.
Thereafter, a memorandum of the articles recovered was prepared in the presence of the witnesses and was duly attested by them.
The office registered it on January 14, 1955, in its register.
An inventory of the twenty wooden cases lying on the platform near the weighing machine as booked by the Assistant Station Master was also prepared and the same was attested by the witnesses.
On the same day he sent a report of the aforesaid facts to the Special Police Establishment Office, Madhya Bharat.
The numbers of the rupee numberes intended to be given as bribe to the Assistant Station Master were entered in a memorandum which was attested by witnesses.
The numbers on those numberes tallied with those numbered in the memorandum.
The accused preferred a Revision against the said order to the High Court of Madhya Pradesh.
The Sub Inspector, having regard to the aforesaid facts, came to the companyclusion that the facts disclosed offences punishable under ss.
On January 11, 1955, between 12 and 1 p. m., he companytacted the Sub Inspector of Police, Special Police Establishment, Gwalior, and gave him the following information The companypany had opened their stall in the Gwalior Mela and he Shri Bhalla had to book empty wooden cases of machine and machine parts from Gwalior Mela, to Now Delhi.
By the said order the learned Judge, presumably an officer different from the one who gave the adjournment in 1955, disallowed the objection of the accused on the ground that on the date when the Magistrate gave the sanction, there were many papers in companynection with a case against the accused, on observing which the Magi strate companyld have satisfied himself whether there was a prima facie case or number against the accused and that there was numberreason to believe that at the time of giving the sanction, the Magistrate did number peruse the papers.
141 of 1958.
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Appeal No.
He also searched the person of Shri Bhalla and took from his shirt two currency numberes, which he did number give to the Assistant Station Master, as the bargain was struck at a smaller amount, and secured the same.
The Assistant Station Master, when questioned by the Sub Inspector, gave him his name and also produced the numberes which he had kept in his pocket.
The record does number disclose what further steps were taken by the Sub Inspector after he obtained the said permission from the Additional District Magistrate.
We do number know what transpired between December 3, 1955, and the date of disposal of the objections by the Special Judge, i. e., August 21, 1957.
Seven days thereafter, on January 21, 1955, the Sub Inspector filed an application before the Additional District Magistrate Judicial , Gwalior, asking for permission to investigate the offence under the aforesaid sections.
But the scope of the objections is number clear as they have number been placed before us.
2/57 Special Case.
The numbers of those numberes also tallied with the companyresponding numbers numbered in the memorandum.
One Shri Mohinder Nath Bhalla was the manager of Daisy Sewing Machine Co. Ltd., Bhopal.
120 B and 161 of the Indian Penal Code and s. 5 2 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 2 of 1947 , had been companymitted by the Assistant Station Master, Shri Mubarak Ali, and the pointsman, Shri Mool Chand, of Golakamandir railway station.
The respondent did number appear.
C. Mathur and R. H. Dhebar, for the appellant.
The plan was carried out in detail as agreed.
The police officer went along with the informant to his stall at Gwalior Mela and saw the twenty wooden cases twelve big and eight small ready for booking.
The facts are simple.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by SUBBA RAO, J. This is an appeal by special leave against the, Judgment of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur directing the Special Judge, Indore, to order the Deputy Superintendent of Police to carry on the investigation afresh.
Subsequently, the Assistant Station Master agreed to accept annas eight for each case and asked him to bring the wooden cases between 2 and 4 p. m. on the same day, i.e., January 11, 1955.
February 3.
He was also told that on his giving a signal, the police would companye on the scene.
Shri Bhalla was instructed to pay the amount to the Assistant Station Master when demanded by him in such a manner that the witnesses companyld overhear the companyversation and also see the Assistant Station Master taking the bribe.
