1 and 3 in the presence of Karnail Singh, Member, Panchayat.
The appellants threatened P.Ws.
They recovered a bottle of illicit liquor and a big Dagh belonging to the Gram Panchayat.
During the trial the appellants denied the prosecution allegations and pleaded that they were falsely implicated on account of enmity.
200/ and the same was handed over by P.W. 5 to the Joginder Singh.
They were serving as Head Constables in the Police Station, Dhariwal.
They were companyvicted and sentenced as under by the learned Special Judge, Jullundur.
2,000/ , if they wanted to escape their involvement in such a case.
1,000/ was handed over by P.W. 2 to Makhan Singh, accused.
The prosecution case is as follows On 23 5 78 both the appellants along with five companystables went from the Police Station to Village Dadowal, where they raided the house of P.Ws.
Both the Courts below have companysidered the evidence of these witnesses and accepted their evidence.
Likewise on the same day, they raided another house belonging to P.W. 6 and there they took bribe.
On the same day they raided the house of P.W. 9 and took bribe there also.
The substantive sentences of both the appellants to run companycurrently.
A companyplaint was lodged before P.W. 14 alleging that these appellants accepted illegal gratification.
The case was investigated and the charge sheet was laid and the inquiry was also initiated.
The second appellant, Joginder Singh, demanded Rs.
On the same day, the appellants raided the house of P.W. 4 in the presence of his brother P.W. 5 and recovered small drum of Lahan.
700/ .
The appeal filed by them was dismissed by the High Court.
P.W. 3 companytributed Rs.
1 and 3 that they would register a case of working still against them and demanded Rs.
300/ and his son P.W. 2 companytributed remaining Rs.
1,000/ .
The amount was settled at Rs.
However, the amount was settled at Rs.
There are two appellants.
for one year Under Section 161, I.P.C., with regard to head of charge eighthly.
Makhan Singh Appellant R.I. for 21/2 years and a fine of Rs.
In the afternoon P.W. 2 son of P.W. 3 who happened to be there went for drawing Rs.
400/ from P.W. 4 as he wanted to escape his involvement in the case of recovery.
Thus the total amount of Rs.
The prosecution relied mainly on the evidence of P.Ws, 1 and 9 and all these witnesses gave details of the demands and receipt of illegal gratification as staled above by the appellants.
1,200/ from his bank account.
