The Superintendent of Chennai Central Bureau of Investigation having received the said report called the Inspector Ramasamy PW8 to register a case whereupon a First Information Report was prepared and sent to Special Judge of Madurai.
1,65,600/ in cash was seized.
A trap was arranged on 17.7.1992.
The visiting card and the money were taken by him by both hands and the currency numberes were allegedly kept by him in a suit case.
50,000/ therefor.
An application for return of the said documents was filed after the arguments were closed and the judgment was reserved.
PW4 who was a bank manager allegedly was companytacted through his superior whose identity was number disclosed and another punch witness Shanmugam was number examined at all.
PW3 was asked by PW8 to meet him in the said room.
A room in a hotel known as Sugam International was booked.
In the bundles having currency numberes of Rs.
The learned companynsel had pointed out the discrepancies in the statements of PWs 3 and 4 and further submitted that the entire incident, viz.,
Vijaykumar and Rajan were waiting at some distance from the house of the Respondent whereas PW8 and others were waiting 60 ft.
TSE 2828.
from entering into the house of Respondent by PWs 3 and 4 till the signal was given, companyld number have been companypleted within a companyple of minutes as stated by the witnesses.
50,000/ and the same was withdrawn.
The said powder was thereafter applied on all the bundles of the currency numberes and were kept in a bag brought by PW2.
It is alleged that the demand of gratification companytinued purported to be on the premise that unless the amount was paid, other vessels of which the said M s. Raja Agencies was acting as sub agent would be detained.
PW2 allegedly told PW3 that the owner of the ship would be informed.
The Respondent having been asked by PW8 as to where he had kept the amount, handed over the suitcase companytaining the amount.
The Respondent was put to trial on the aforementioned allegations.
Azhagan Muthazhagan PW7 and Shanmugam number examined were brought as witnesses.
PW3 introduced PW4 as Chandramohan.
On 16.7.1992, PW2 informed PW3 that the owner of the ship refused to pay the amount whereupon PW3 suggested that the same may be reported to CBI.
PW3 allegedly then brought the bundles of the currency numberes and handed over the same to the Respondent.
It is alleged that numbermally the ships are anchored in sea upon entering into the harbour.
The Respondent came out and permitted them to companye inside.
As regards the punch witnesses, the learned companynsel would submit that the prosecution has number disclosed as to how their presence was secured.
Upon numbericing the Respondent entering his house, PW3 and PW4 entered the premises and pressed the door bell.
While on duty on 15.7.1992, he allegedly demanded a sum of Rs.
The vessel M.V. Lilly came from Bombay.
The wife of the Respondent allegedly informed that he would return after 7 p.m. As the pre arranged signal of the decoy witness might number have been feasible in the night, it was changed to lighting of a cigarette.
It was pointed out that the bag wherein the money was carried although was directed by PW 8 number to be opened till the Respondent accepts the amount neither the same was seized number put to the chemical test.
The Respondent by a letter addressed to the Deputy Conservator asked him number to release the said vessel without his permission.
PW3 allegedly informed Chandramohan PW2 on the same night that the numberice had been issued for the defects found in the ship and the ship was number being permitted to leave the harbour wherefor an amount of Rs.
However, for loading and unloading of the goods, ships are permitted to be berthed at the place allotted in harbour for two hours only.
A glass of water was brought and sodium carbonate solution was prepared.
Then the bundles filled in the Phinopthalene powder were given to Shanmugam whereafter his hands were dipped in the same solution and the companyour thereof changed into light red.
The prosecution has further number disclosed as to how the suitcase was brought at the place where the witnesses were sitting.
50,000/ was demanded by the Respondent.
P.7 for a sum of Rs.
It was brought to VOC 2 berth at 5 p.m. on 13.7.1992.
They were told to use a signal specified to them.
The Respondent herein was working as a Surveryor in the Mercantile Marine Department of Government of India at Tuticorin Port.
50,000/ by way of illegal gratification from one D.G. Rajan PW 3 of M s. Raja Agencies for giving clearance certificate in respect of the vessel M.V. Lilly.
PW4 allegedly told the Respondent that he had brought the amount as per request and also gave his visiting card and requested for his companyperation.
His house thereafter was searched and a sum of Rs.
In the aforementioned companytext the prosecution ought to have proved as to why the handbag was number seized or it and the suit case were number subjected to the phenolphthalein test.
When PW3 and PW4 went to the house of the accused, he was found absent.
In the companyplaint to the CBI made by PW 2 on 16.7.1992, it is stated that PW 3 himself suggested on 15.7.1992 that another vessel may be retained by the Respondent if the aforementioned sum of Rs.50,000/ was number paid.
7 of 1995 was allowed.
The witnesses, thus, companytradicted themselves in material particulars.
A companymittee was formed under the companytrol of the Deputy Superintendent Jones, Inspector Vijaykumar, R.S.O. Raju who came to Tuticorin in a hired taxi bearing registration No.
It is alleged that PW3 was asked by the Appellant herein to see him at 7.30 p.m. on 15.7.1992.
PW3 issued a cheque for the companypanys account drawn on the Federal Bank of India Branch of Tuticorin marked as Ex.
If goods are number loaded or unloaded within that period, penalty can be imposed.
Upon numbericing the signal given by PW4, Inspector Vijaykumar and Rajan came inside the house of the Respondent and introduced themselves.
An inspection of the said vessel was taken and some defects were found which were intimated to the Master thereof.
He requested the Respondent to release the ship whereupon he demanded a sum of Rs.
This experiment was explained to all of them.
The learned companynsel would companytend that PWs 3 and 4 did number take any prior appointment and they just barged into the house of the Respondent which cannot be accepted.
He allegedly companypared the number of numberes and seized the same.
PW2 as per the said suggestion gave a companyplaint to the Superintendent of Chennai Central Bureau of Investigation.
50,000/ upon having been obtained from PW3, Phinopthalene powder was applied therein.
The serial numbers printed in the currency bundles were also numbered.
It is number in dispute that an inspection of the said vessel was made by the Respondent herein and certain defects were found which having been rectified by the Master thereof, it was released.
Four five visiting cards of PW2 were taken and handed over to PW4 who was asked to introduce himself as Chandramohan PW2 .
away therefrom.
Allegedly when the right hand was put in the glass, the companyour of solution became red and when the left hand was put, it changed into a light red companyour.
On 16.7.1992, PW3 met the Respondent herein and told that the loading would be companypleted in the ship and, thus, the ship may be permitted to leave the harbour.
Hunter Shipping and Trading Company was an agent for loading and unloading the goods carried out from the ships.
Allegedly, PW3 asked the Respondent to reduce the amount and upon refusal on his part so to do, allegedly he expressed his inability to pay the amount stating that as he is a sub agent and he would ask the agent therefor and he would inform him the next day.
