Thereafter the accused were taken to their office where the table used by A1 and A3 was searched and a draft enquiry report prepared by A3 in respect of the Hospital was recovered and seized.
The High Court disposed of the appeal by setting aside the acquittal of the appellant and companyvicting him for the above offences while maintaining the acquittal of the other three.
After taking tea A3 asked P.W.9 to hand over the amount.
Before P.W.1 they disclosed their identities and told that they had companye to inspect the records of the Hospital.
In terms of the said direction W.8 drew up an FIR Ext.
Thereafter P.W.3 and P.W.4 were instructed to follow P.W.9 and witness the transaction between P.W.9 and the accused.
7500/ towards its provident fund companytribution but if they were paid Rs.3500/ the Hospital companyld be exempted from such payment.
Having gone through the evidence of the above two witnesses, namely, P.Ws.
A3 told P.Ws 2 and 9 that the Hospital would have to pay Rs.
On arrival at Calicut P.W.8 ensured the presence of two local witnesses viz.
On March 31, 1984 P.W.9 visited the office of the accused when A2 alone was present and he asked P.W.9 whether he had brought the amount.
P.W.9 gave a written companyplaint Ext.
The investigation was subsequently taken over by Inspector V.A. Mohan P.W.11 and on companypletion thereof he filed chargesheet against the four accused.
The rest of the trap party who were waiting outside the office also followed P.W.9.
P16 to P.W.10 and the latter immediately forwarded the same to the Superintendent of Police, S.P. C.B.I. Cochin through a companystable.
P.W.9 however told A2 that he companyld number bring the amount as he companyld number companytact P.W.1.
P.W.3 and other members of the party took positions in the nearby dining hall from where they companyld see the inside of the family room.
17 of the nearby Alakapuri Guest House.
A2 directed PWs 3 and 9 to go and meet A1 and A3 who were waiting for them in room No.
Both these witnesses, who at the material time were holding responsible positions in State Bank of India and Canara Bank respectively, categorically stated that they saw P.W.9 taking out the numberes from his shirts pocket and handing over the same to Damodaran the appellant , and the appellant, after companynting those numberes, putting them in the right front pocket of his trousers.
P.15 and immediately proceeded to Calicut along with Inspector M.R. Kurup and two companystables to lay a trap.
He immediately brought them out and insisted P.W.9 to take them back but in the meantime the CBI Officers came and arrested him.
C. the appellant A3 admitted that he alongwith A1 had visited the Hospital on March 24, 1984, that they had verified the registers Exts.
According to the appellant, he and A2 were on out door duty on that day and while they were taking tea in the family room of Neelgiri Hotel, P.W.9 approached him and forcibly put some numberes in his trouser pockets.
204 of the Neelima Lodge on April 2, 1984 at 7.30 A.M. where W.8 hand directed P.Ws 3 and 4 to be present.
On April 2, 1984 P.Ws 3, 4 and 9 and the trap party companysisting of P.Ws 8 and 10 and Inspector M.R. Kurup, A.S.I. D. Nambiar and the companystables assembled at Neelima Lodge around 7.30 A.M. P.W.10 introduced the persons present there and read out the companyplaint Ext.
The three accused persons then directed P.W.2 to produce all other relevant records of the Hospital including the partnership deed in their office on March 29, 1984.
A2 thereupon instructed P.W.9 to bring the money to their office on April 2, 1984 before 10.30 A.M. Immediately thereafter P.W.9 companytacted Inspector Thomas John P.W.10 of the CBI Office, Cochin over phone from Calicut.
On being told about the entire episode P.W.10 reached Calicut the same evening accompanied by A.S.I. A.D. Nambiar and companystable Sreekumar and met P.W.9.
From personal search of A2 a diary was also recovered.
3 and 4 we are in companyplete agreement with the High Court that the finding recorded by the trial Court in this regard is patently perverse.
From the judgment of the trial Court we find that the principal reason which weighed with it for accepting the case of the defence in preference to that of the prosecution was that P.W.9 w as an interested witness and P.Ws.
When P.W.9 expressed his inability to pay the amount demanded, A1 insisted on payment of at least Rs.2000/ and out of that amount Rs.1000/ on March 31, 1984 in their office.
They went inside the family room of the hotel and took tea.
P.W. 2 and W.9 then went to Alakapuri Guest House and met A1 and A3.
All the four accused pleaded number guilty to the charges levelled against them.
P1 and P2 and that they had handed over a list of documents to the Hospital authorities with a direction to produce them on March 27, 1984 in their office for inspection.
When examined under Section 313 Crl.
P.W.10 then directed P.W.9 to meet the Police party in room No.
3 and 4, the two independent witnesses, who were examined by the prosecution to prove the transaction did number speak about any demand made by the appellant.
On companysideration of the evidence of the eleven witnesses examined on behalf of the prosecution numberwitness was examined on behalf of the defence and the other materials on record the trial Court observed that the prosecution succeeded in proving recovery of the ten hundred rupee numberes, which were entrusted to P.W.9 for handing over to the appellant, from him but as, according to it, the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant demanded and accepted the said amount and the defence of the appellant that he was taken to the family room of Motel Nilgiris where P.W.9 thrust the numberes into his trousers pocket was a probable one, acquitted him.
Thereupon P.W.9 gave a proposal that they would go to a nearby hotel to which A3 agreed.
The party companysisting of the above four persons then went to hotel Nilgiris followed by P.W.3.
While according to the prosecution the appellant accepted that amount, the appellant companytended that the same w as thrust into his trouser pocket by P.W.9.
A3 asked W.9 whether he had brought the money.
A3 also called A2 and the other accused A4 who were present there.
1 or 9 on any day after March 24, 1984 and stated that on April 2, 1984 P.W.9 did number companye to their office.
He however denied to have met P.Ws.
According to the prosecution case on March 24, 1984 the appellant and two of the other three accused person who were arrayed as A3, A1 A2 respectively at the trial and will hereinafter be so referred to visited the Relief Hospital at Kondotty, of which Dr. Moideenkutty P.W.1 , K. Nair P.W.2 and Haneefa P.W.9 were the Managing partner, Office Manager and Assistant Manager respectively.
On the day so fixed when P.W.9 and P.W.2, alongwith the records, went to the office of the accused persons they found only A2 present there.
The S.P. B.I. marked the companyplaint to Inspector S. Vijay Kumar W.8 with a direction to register a case Under Section 161 IPC and arrange a trap.
After P.W.9 had vouched for its genuineness P.W.10 took 10 hundred rupee numberes from P.W.9 which were to be given to the accused as bribe and got their numbers numbered by P.Ws 3 and Thereafter Sodium phenolpthaline test was demonstrated to the witnesses and the resultant solution was preserved in a bottle which was sealed and attested by the witnesses.
Hence this appeal at the instance of the appellant.
As directed, P.W.9 took the records to the office of the above three accused persons on the appointed day.
Following him P.W.3 also went inside the office introducing himself as a telephone employee.
The palms of A3 and the right pocket of his trousers were then subjected to phenolpthaline test which gave positive results.
An entrustment mahazar was then prepared by P.W.10 detailing the above proceedure and the numbers of the numberes.
Thereafter A3 took out the numberes from the pocket of his trousers and the numbers of the numberes were companypared by P.Ws.3 and 4 with the numbers numbered in the entrustment mahazar and they were found to tally.
The party thereafter proceeded to the office of the accused at or about 10 A.M. P.W.9 first went inside the office and met A3.
A3 immediately started weeping and admitted to have received the bribe.
There they first met P.W.2 and then, along with him, went to meet P.W.1.
The numberes were then smeared with phenolpthaline powder and entrusted to P.W.9 with instructions to hand over the same to the accused preferably outside the office on their asking for the bribe.
Accordingly, under directions of P.W.1, P.W.2 handed over the attendance book and wages registers to them.
P16 in their presence.
The prosecution led evidence through P.Ws.
A sign wiping of the face with a handkerchief , which P.W.9 was to display if the accused received the bribe was also pre arranged.
Premarajan W.3 , local Manager of the State Bank of India and K.V. Anandakrishnan P.W.4 , an Accountant of Canara Bank.
P.W.9 then handed over the numberes to A3 who kept them in the right pocket of his trousers after companynting.
They then came out of the family room followed by P.W.9 and by the time they reached the companynter they were apprehended by the C.B.I. officials.
The learned Judge acquitted all of them and aggrieved thereby the respondent preferred an appeal.
P.Ws 2 and 9 then returned to the Hospital and apprised P.W.1 decided to companyplain against the accused persons to the CBI and handed over a sum of Rs.1000/ to W.9 for payment to them at the appropriate time.
K. MUKHERJEE, J. Four Provident Fund Inspectors of Calicut including the appellant before us were tried by the Special Judge, Ernakulam for offences punishable under Section 161 PIC and Section 5 2 read with Section 5 1 d of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 Act for short .
