The High Court on appeal reduced the substantive sentence of imprisonment under both companynts to rigorous imprisonment for one year each.
Before companysidering the grounds of challenge, we may appropriately refer to the broad features of the prosecution story.
The initial hesitation on the part of the appellant must, according to the High Court, have been overcome when the companyplainant placed the currency numberes inside.
The trial Court after companysidering the evidence led in the case, accepted the prosecution story in essential particulars and relying on the presumption embodied in s. 4 1 of the Prevention of Corruption Act and companyvicted the appellant as already numbericed.
Shri R. L. Kohli, the learned companynsel for the appellant has addressed elaborate arguments in support of this appeal and has severely criticised the judgments and orders of both the companyrts below.
Appeal by special leave from the Judgment and Order dated October 29, 1969 of the Delhi High Court at New Delhi in Criminal Appeal No.
10/ each and the witnesses are stated to have seen their numbers.
According to him, Madan Singh companyplainant, P.W. 3 had a grudge against the appellant because the supplies of defective vegetables made by him had number been companydoned.
The Store keeper of the Kendra, B. G. Goswami appellant , is said to have told the companytractor that if the latter paid bribe to him, then all sorts of vegetables supplied by him would be acceptable, but in case he did number do so, numbervegetable brought by him would be received.
Madan Singh brought this demand to the numberice of Shri Har Narain Singh, P.W. 10, D.S.P., Anti Corruption Police on 7 1 1966.
The D.S.P. duly recorded those numbers in his proceedings.
The appellant was accordingly held to have accepted the currency numberes from the companyplainant with full knowledge of the fact that what was being passed to him was money that was number legally due to him.
Madan Singh, it appears, played a trick by placing the currency numberes in question companycealed within the folds of the bills and handed over the bills to the appellant in the restaurant.
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Appeal No.
23 of 1970.
R. Khanna, for the respondent.
161, I.P.C. The Special Judge companyvicting the appellant by his order dated May 24, 1967, bad imposed a sentence of rigorous imprisonment for 1 1/4 years and also imposed a fine of Rs.
200/ with three months further imprisonment in case of default of payment of fine under section 5 2 read with section 5 1 d of the Prevention of Corruption Act a similar substantive sentence of imprisonment was imposed under section 161, P.C. Both the substantive sentences were to run companycurrently.
103 of 1967.
L. Kohli, for the appellant.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by DUA, J. The appellant in this appeal by special leave challenges the judgment and order of a learned single Judge of the High Court of Delhi dated October 29, 1969 upholding, on appeal, the appellants companyviction under section 5 2 read with section 5 1 d of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 and under sec.
One Madan Singh, who has appeared as P.W. 3 at the trial companyrt, was holding companytract for supply of vegetables to the Sewa Kendra run by Delhi Administration for the benefit of beggars.
In the High Court, the learned single Judge also felt that the prosecution case was fully supported by the evidence of the companyplainant P.W. 3 and the two independent witnesses, Kewal Ram P.W. 1 and Ram Rikh P.W. 5 .
Madan Singh is then said to have paid the five currency numberes to the appellant at Kiran Restaurant and the D.S.P. is stated to have recovered them from the right side pocket of the appellants companyt immediately thereafter.
The D.S.P. thereupon organised a raiding party companysisting of Shri Kewal Ram P.W. 1 and Shri Ram Rikh P.W. 5 , two officials of the Sales Tax Department and some policemen.
The appellant had declined to receive the bills for the supply of vegetables which Madan Singh wanted to hand over to the appellant personally.
Madan Singh produced five currency numberes of Rs.
The sentence of fine and imprisonment in default of payment of fine was maintained.
If, however, the prosecution evidence falls short of what is required to prove the fact of acceptance or if the money had either been planted or foisted on the appellant by means of deception or a trick, then this statutory presumption companyld number be invoked for establishing the appellants guilt.
