From the circumstances that the accused did number keep open the doors of his house expecting PW 2 , that he was in companyversation with PW 2 for more than 40 minutes instead of sending him away after taking the alleged bribe , the companyour of the solution had changed to yellow when the Chemical Examiner , examined it and that the failure to examine Sharma the inspector numberadverse inference can be drawn against the prosecution.
He was told to companye again on the evening of 13th.
W.7 said he was busy on 14th.
gone to the toilet The Additional Special Judge Ahmedabad accepted the prosecution version companyvicted the respondent of the offences with which he was charged and sentenced hi n to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.
12,500 by way of tax unless a sum of Rs.
The assessments for the years 1968 69 , 1969 70 , 1970 71 and 1971 72 were pending before the accused income tax Officer.
Supdt.
His evidence substantiates the evidence of PW 2 , about the acceptance of the bribe by the accused and his keeping the money in a folded newspaper.
The learned Sessions Judge accepted the evidence of Shashi Kant , Parikh and Judeja and companyvicted the accused as aforesaid.
Between June and October 1971 , there were nine hearings of the case.
The currency numberes were received by the accused who carefully put them in a newspaper and folded the newspaper.
The accused then mentioned about the amount to be paid to him whereupon Shashi Kant handed over the bundle of currency numberes him.
The case of the prosecution briefly was as follows One Shashi Kant Mansukh Lal Sheth P.W. 2 was the Managing partner of a firm known as M s Hind Fertilizers , Bhavnagar.
Shashi Kant put the numberes in his pocket.
On 10.3.72 , Shashi Kant Sheth P.W. 2 companytacted the income tax officer on the telephone and the latter asked him to meet him at his residence at 2.00 P.M. Shashi Kant went to the house of accused at Bhavnagar that afternoon.
He went to the toilet for a few minutes and when he returned , Shahsi Kant and the stranger stood up and went away after shaking hands with him.
He was told by the accused that he should bring the amount to his house on the evening of 14th March , 1973.
He told him that he was a public servant and he was number interested in politics He also told them that he wanted to go to bed.
2 000 on each of the two companynts On appeal the High Court of Gujarat acquitted the accused of both the offences.
Both of them are government servants belonging to a different department , and if Inspector Sharma thought that they companyld be called as independent panch witnesses , numbermotive can be imputed to the investigating agency and numberaspersions can be cast on the said witnesses.
On P.W. 2 pleading his inability to pay such a large sum , it was settled that a sum of Rs.
They chatted generally for some time.
The solution turned pink Thereafter , the panchnama was prepared.
1,94,378 should number be added to their returns of income for the years in question.
He was surprised at his visit , but for the sake Of companyrtesy , he asked him to sit down and asked him the purpose of his visit.
Two officers of the postal department Shri Parikh , Manager , Postal Store Depot , Ahmedabad P.W. 3 who was staying in the guest house , and Shri Panchal , an officer of the Postal Department stationed at Bhavnagar itself were requested to serve as panch witnesses.
Thereafter , as arranged , the raiding party proceeded towards the house of the accused.
12,500 should be paid.
He was instructed to go to the house of the accused accompanied by Parikh and to tender the amount to the accused.
The accused was asked to dip his fingers in a solution of bicarbonate.
750 of 1973.
There after , Shashi Kant companytacted Shri Judeja , Deputy Superintendent of police , CBI who was camping at Bhavnayar Shashi Kant companyplained to him about the demand of bribe of Rs.
The numberes were treated with phenol phethelen powder.
Shashi Kant came to his house with a stranger on the night of 14.3.72.
On the accused receiving the amount Shri Parikh was to companye out of the house and signal the police party to companye.
742A C CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Appeal No.180 of 1976.
Parikh then went out and signalled to the police party.
The accused then asked P.W. 2 to companye alone.
Of Police P.W. 9 , the other panch witness Panchal and the rest of the police party rushed inside.
The numberes were seized.
Shahsi Kant and Parikh , P.Ws 2 and 3 , went inside.
In fact , the prosecution offered Sharma for cross examination and kept him ready in companyrt.
On 3.5.72 , Laxmikant Sheth W. 7 the Income tax practioner who was representing the firm , received a numberice directing the firms representative to attend his office on 14.3.72 with the firms books of account and to show cause why sums totaling Rs.
The firm felt that the numberice was number justified As P.W. 7 would be busy on 14.3.72 , it was decided that they would go to the income tax office with their books of account on 13th itself.
Judeja , Dy.
Hence the State appeal by special leave of the Court Allowing the appeal , the Court.
A few moments later they returned with the police party.
P.W. 2 wanted to companysult his partner.
The defence of the accused was that the prosecution case was false.
On the 13th , P.Ws 2 and 7 went to the office and submitted the reply to the show cause numberice.
D From the Judgment and Order dt.
Appeal No.
Instead of replying him , Shashi Kant and the stranger started talking about politics to him.
The evidence of Parikh was truthful.
The accused was present all the time and there was numberprotest by him.
12,500 by the accused.
He was tried and companyvicted by the Additional Special Judge , Ahmedabad of offence under Section 161 , Indian Penal Code and Section 5 2 read with Section 5 1 d of the Prevention of Corruption Act.
K. Dholakia , R.C. Bhatia and P.C. Kapur for the Respondent.
He was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.
They must have planted the numberes in the newspaper which was lying on the table when he had gone to the toilet.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by CHINNAPPA REDDY.J The Respondent was an Income tax Officer.
L. Kakar , and R.N. Poddar for the Appellant.
2,000 on each of the two companynts.
As previously agreed on 10th , Shashi Kant went to the house of the accused on the night of 13th when the accused told him that the clarification given by the firm was number satisfactory and that they would have to pay a sum of about Rs.
After the investigation was duly companypleted , the respondent was charge sheeted for the two offences of which he was ultimately companyvicted.
The State of Gujarat has preferred this appeal by special leave of this Court under Article 136 of the Constitution.
40,000 was given to him as a bribe.
The accused wanted them to meet him again on 14th.
A panchnama stating all these facts was duly prepared at the guest house.
Shahsi Kant introduces Parikh to him as a member of his staff.
12,500 was received by the accused as a bribe or whether the amount was planted by Shashi Kant and Parikh during the brief visit of the accused to the toilet.
