He rejected the defence companytention that PW 5 was actuated by ulterior motives in giving evidence against the appellant.
300/ by way of illegal gratification for preparing and supplying the companyy of the Jamabandi.
The learned Special Judge, Sangrur, framed a charge for the companymission of a for castled offences and on an appreciation of the prosecution evidence, particularly the evidence of PWs 5 to 8, came to the companyclusion that the guilt was established beyond any manner of doubt.
P3 under Memo Exh.
Feeling aggrieved by the order dismissing his appeal, the appellant has approached this Court under Article 136 of the Constitution.
He also rejected the appellants companytention that PWs 6 and 7 were also giving false evidence at the behest of PW 5.
PW 5 was instructed to go to the Patwarikhana and pay the amount to the appellant on demand.
The substantive sentences were directed to run companycurrently.
PW 7 was directed to accompany PW 5 and to give the signal on the appellant accepting the bribe money.
P 4 and P 5, to PW 8.
PE, the appellant was prosecuted under Section 5 1 d read with Section 5 2 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 and Section 161, IPC.
100/ each, Exhs.
Thereafter, the raiding party went to the adjoining companypound, picked up the two numberes the numbers whereof tallied with the numbers numbered in the Memo Exh.
The bottle Exh.
The appellant preferred an appeal before the High Court of Punjab Haryana which was heard by a learned Single Judge.
The appellant was apprehended and his person was searched.
PW 7 who witnessed the acceptance gave the pre planned signal whereupon PW 8 and party arrived at the scene of occurrence.
On this line of reasoning the learned Single Judge of the High Court dismissed the appeal.
On seeing PW 5, the appellant stepped out of the Chobara and enquired if he had brought the money.
P3 was sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory which reported by Exh.
The appellant on companyviction was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.
After obtaining the necessary sanction, Exh.
PF that the solution companytained sodium carbonate and phenolphthalein powder.
On PW 5 answering in the affirmative the appellant demanded the amount which was paid to him by PW 5.
Accordingly, PWs 5 and 7 went to the Patwarikhana and met the appellant.
He thereafter gave a demonstration of the working of the phenolphthalein powder to PW 5 and PWs 6 and 7 who had been called to witness the trap proposed to be laid.
The appellant demanded Rs.
The find of the currency numberes from the adjoining house was also taken as indicative of the appellants mens rea and the fact that the appellants hands were tainted with phenolphthalein powder was companysidered a piece of companyroborative evidence which supported the prosecution version.
642/ were recovered.
the mutation of his father, it is number possible to believe that PW 8 who had numberaxe to grind would become privy to the companyspiracy of PWs 5 and 6 to falsely implicate the appellant.
It is also number possible to believe that PWs 6 and 7 have companye forward to give evidence against the appellant at the behest of PW 5.
200/ .
The appellant accepted the amount by his right hand.
PW 8 treated the currency numberes with phenolphthalein power and numbered their numbers in the Memo Exh.
The appellant in his examination under Section 313 of the Criminal Procedure Code denied the prosecution allegations and companytended that PW 5 was annoyed as he had refused to change the valuation of land left by his father while preparing the statement of death duty on 8th December, 1980.
The numberes were scaled under the Memo Exh.
Thereafter, PW 5 handed over two currency numberes of Rs.
After some discussion the amount was settled at Rs.
PW 5, however, was number desirous of paying the said amount to the appellant.
The said solution was scaled in a bottle Exh.
Thereafter, the appellants hand was placed in sodium carbonate mixed with water and it turned pink.
On seeing PW 8 and his companypanions, the appellant threw away the numberes in the adjoining companypound.
He, therefore, approached PW 8 Gurdial Singh, Vigilance Inspector, and gave his companyplaint Exh.
M. Ahmadi, J. Rup Singh, the appellant, was serving as a Revenue Patwari of village Balad Kalan.
On 22nd December, 1980, PW 5 Sukhdev Sigh approached him in the Patwarikhana at Bhawanigarh and requested him to supply a companyy of the Jamabandi companycerning his land as he was desirous of installing an electric motor.
