However, the trap party 2/ 2 headed by Shri Arvind Prasad, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vigilance PW 7 did number treat the numberes handed over to the companyplainant, which are said to have been given to the appellant by way of illegal gratification, with phenolphthalein powder and as a result of that, numbertest was companyducted to prove the recovery of tainted numberes from the pocket of the shirt of the appellant.
The appellant was companyvicted by the trial Court under Section 161 Indian Penal Code, Section 5 2 read with Section 5 i d of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947, and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay fine of Rupees one thousand in default, to undergo further imprisonment for a period of six months.
The allegation against the appellant was that while working as Head Assistant in the office of Superintending Engineer, Rural Engineering Organization, Boring Canal Road, Patna, he demanded rupees nine hundred from the companyplainant, namely, Braj Bihari Mishra PW 14 as companysideration for getting his name registered as companytractor.
Thereupon, PW 14 lodged a companyplaint with the D.I.G., Vigilance and a trap was laid leading to the recovery of rupees nine hundred from the pocket of the appellants shirt.
During trial, the companyplainant and the only independent witness, namely, Javed Ahmed PW 15 did number support the prosecution case and they were declared hostile.On appeal being preferred, the High Court upheld the companyviction but reduced the sentence of imprisonment to the period already undergone as it was stated that the appellant had remained in custody for a period of about one month.
Heard learned companynsel for the parties.
