30.00 on February 20 the trial companyrt held that Sheikh Ahmed was number present at that time and companyld number be held to be guilty of abetment of that crime, particularly as the letter Ex.
The State of Maharashtra has companye to this Court by special leave against the view taken by the High Court acquitting the two respondents.
50 00 already paid or secure the job for him.
Consequently, Dongarsing went to Dhulia along with Sheikh Ahmed and met jagatsing and it was settled that Dongarsing would pay Rs.
25.00 were immediately paid on that very day namely November 25,.1955 and the remaining amount of Rs.
As to the payment of Rs.
25.00 in November and December 1955 as he was an accomplice.
The trial companyrt found on the facts that the prosecution had proved its case beyond reasonable doubt and that Jagatsingh had accepted the currency numberes which Dongarsing gave him on February 20 as illegal gratification as a motive for securing the job for Dongarsing.
Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated May 17, 1960, of the Bombay High Court in Criminal Appeal No.
50.00 as bribe to Jagatsingh for securing the job of a driver.
Sheikh Ahmed told Dongarsing that jagatsing respondent No.
2 who was in service in the said department at jamner and asked him for help.
29/ on, which the charge of abetment was based was never handed over by Dongarsing to Jagatsingh.
jagatsingh replied that he companyld number return the money as it had already been, paid to other persons but said that if he paid another Rs.
1 who was an officer in the State Transport Corporation at Dhulia would be able to secure a job for Dongarsing provided he was paid money.
By this time how ever Dongarsing had become suspicious of the bona fides of jagatsingh and he therefore approached the anti corruption department.
Thereafter Dongar singh met Sheikh Ahmed respondent No.
30.00 in currency numberes were given to Dongarsing for passing on to jagatsing after applying anthracene powder to them.
It was however found that particles of anthracene powder were on the thumb and two fingers of jagatsing and also on the seam of the right pocket of the pant of his trousers.
So a trap was laid for catching Jagatsingh and Rs.
Eventually on February 20, 1956, this amount of Rs.
jagatsingh denied his guilt and said that he had numberhing to do with the appointment of drivers and companyductors and was never in a position to do anything for Dongarsing.
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Appeal 183 of 1961.
30.00 was passed on by Dongarsingh to Jagatsing at about 3 p.m. After the money was paid the police caught jagatsingh who had the money in his hands but threw it down on being challenged.
The currency numberes were then picked up and the necessary panchnama was prepared and after further investigation jagatsingh and Sheikh Ahmed were I prosecuted.
25.00 was paid a fortnight later about December 9, 1955.
This was followed by an appeal by the State to the High Court of Bombay.
Sheikh Ahmed also denied his guilt and said that all that he did was to help Dongarsing in filling up the printed form but that he never told Dongarsing that he had to pay a bribe to Jagatsingh in order to get the job.
So another printed form of application was procured by Jagatsingh and Dongarsing filled it up and gave it to Jagatsingh.
He then went to Jagatsingh again and asked him to return the sum of Rs.
Dongarsing was informed sometime at the end of January or beginning of February 1956 that his application for the post of driver had been rejected.
50.00 jagatsingh might be able to procure the job for him.
Accordingly Dongarsing applied for a printed form sometime in November 1955 which he received on November 19, 1955.
R. Khanna and R. H. Dhebar, for the appellant.
As to Sheikh Ahmed the trial companyrt held that it would number be safe to accept the testimony of Dongarsing as to the payment of the two sums of money of Rs.
T. V. R. Tatachari, for respondent number 1.
The prosecution case briefly was that one Dongarsing, a discharged truck driver from the army, was in need of employment.
2 of 1959.
Towards the end of October 1955 he made an application to the District Soldiers Board, Dhulia praying for help in securing employment.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by WANCHOO J. This is an appeal by special leave against the judgment of the Bombay High Court by which the two respondents were acquitted.
August 13, 1963.
0 2 0.
This application was forwarded to the Divisional Controller of the State Transport Corporation at Dhulia and Dongarsing was asked by the Corporation to make a formal application on a printed form to be obtained on payment of As.
