Since it was a companymon judgment of the High Court in two ap peals, A 1 has chosen to file two appeals i.e. Criminal Appeals Nos.
At the relevant time A 1 was the Tehsildar and A 2 was village Assistant.
1 and 2 met him in respect of issuance of patta.
A 1 asked him to give the amount to A 2 who was standing nearby.
1987 P.W. 1 sent P.W. 2, his companysin, to enquire about the issuance of patta.
S.P. and gave the statement Ex.
The balance amount of Rs.
On being questioned A 2 took out Rs.
Since, companymon questions arise in these appeals, they can be disposed of together by a companymon judgment.
P W. 1 went out and gave signal.
500/ from P.W. 1 in the office room of A 1 on 10.6.87 as per the instructions of A 1 but added that the amount was accepted without knowing that it was bribe money.
P.C., A 1 admitted that on 9.6.87 P.Ws.
P. W. 1 told A 1 that he has brought the amount but A 1 asked him to give the amount to A 2 who was standing nearby and accordingly he gave the money to A 2 and P.W.2 was with him at that time.
500/ by way of bribe.
One 8.6.
500/and in default to undergo simple impris ionment for a further period of one month for the offence under the prevention of Corruption Act and to rigorous imprisonment for one years for the offence under Sections 161 read with 12 B I.P.C. The substantive sentences of imprisonment were directed to run companycurrently.
He further explained that on.9.5.87 he obtained a loan of Rs 1980/ from his provident fund account which was sanctioned by A 1 and from that amount Rs.
He stated that when P.W. 1 met him A 2 was number there.
The two appellant figured as accused number.
195/90 and 245/90 filed by the appellants herein C.K.Karunakaran and O. Shamsudhin respectively.
p.4 before P.W. 11, Dy.
After satisfactory companypliance of the required formalities, patta was directed to be issued in his favour by the Board of Revenue.
1 and 2 to the office of A 1.
Kunjan had remitted the necessary amount on 25.1.1974 pursuant to a numberice.
One Kunjan, deceased father of P.W.1, Rajan applied for patta with regard to 55 cents of Sarkar Porambokhu land in Kalur Village.
7 and 8, Vigilance Constables followed P.Ws.
P.W. 2 met A 2 who told him that issuance of patta would entail some expenses and P.W. 2 companyveyed the same to P.W. 1 who together with P.W. 2 met the accused at their office when a demand for bribe of Rs.
Then all of them including the mediators P.Ws.
He therefore filed a companyplaint Ex.
500/ from his pant pocket and the numbers of die currency numberes tallied.
He however, denied that he demanded Rs.
The necessary panchnama incorporating all the facts was drawn up.
P.W.1 further deposed that as directed by Dy.
7/89 on the file of the Enquiry Commissioner and Special Judge, Thrissour and they have been found guilty under Section 5 2 read with Section 5 1 d of the Prevention of Corruption Act and under Sections 161 read with 120 B I.P.C. A 1 C.K. Karunakaran was sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine Rs.
A case was registered, mahazarss were prepared and the currency numberes were subjected to Phenolphatelin test and the tainted money was handed over to W. 1 to be given in turn to the accused on demand.
A 2 stated that neither he companyspired number companyluded with A 1 to obtain illegal gratification from P.W.1 and that he was number present in the office of A 1 on 9.6.1987.
The matter was number pursued till 1987.
Corner parts of the currency numberes and the pant worn by A 2 as well as his fingers were dipped in lime water and the Phenolphatelin test proved positive.
500/ was reportedly made.
Before the patta companyld be issued Kunjan died.
When Questioned under Section 313 Cr.
1 and 2 in C.C. No.
JAYACHANDRA REDDY, J. These appeals arise out of a companymon judgment of the High Court of Kerala in Criminal Appeal Nos.
W. 2 also was there at that time.
P.W. 11 and others were also on the move.
The investigation of the crime was partly companyducted by P.W. 11 followed by P.W. 12 who succeeded P.W. 11 and after companypletion of the inves tigation, the charge sheet was laid.
S.P. Vigilance in the presence of P.W. 3, Auditor, District Co operative Bank and P.W.4, Inspector of Factories and Boilers.
P. W. 1 thought it was improper to give the bribe.
Then he gave the necessary signal and thereafter the cap party came in and recovered the money from A 2.
42/was also remitted some time in 1975.
3 and 4 went to the office of A 1.
P.W. 1 gave the amount to A 2 who put Me same in his pant pocket.
451 52/91 and A 2 has chosen to file only one appeal i.e. Criminal Appeal No.553/91.
The appeals filed by them were dismissed by the High Court.
He further stated that A 2 met him just five minutes before the trap party entered his room and he also denied that A 2 companylected the money as directed by him.
P. W. 11 disclosed his identify and P.W. I told him that A 2 had received the money as per the instructions of A 1.
According to P.W. 1, he entered the office of A 1 and told him that he had brought the amount asked for.
S.P. he went to the office of A 1 with the money and that at that time A 1 and A 2 were present in the office.
Then he gave the details of the trap pro ceedings.
A 2, however, admitted that he received a sum of Rs.
Accordingly in the afternoon he and P.W.2 went to Dy.
