Appellant stated that he immediately told the Dy.
SP that he had number accepted any money from Rajendra Dutt whereupon the Dy.
On inquiry by companyplainant Rajendra Dutt appellant replied that he was number well and that he was suffering from companyd Appellant then inquired whether companyplainant Rajendra Dutt had brought the money and the companyplainant replied that he had brought the money and handed over marked currency numberes 15 in number each of the demonination of Rs.
45 of 1980 From the Judgment and Order dated the 17th October, 1979 of the High Court of Rajasthan in S.B. Criminal Appeal No.
The learned special Judge numbered the fact that the companyplainant Rajendra Dutt was number available and, therefore, the first demand at the Factory of Rajendra Dutt on November 20, 1974, has number been proved.
SP, ACD Mahavir Prasad, Clerk Prahlad Narayan, Driver Bajrang Singh and two others.
10/ which the appellant accepted and put the same under his pillow.
Rajendra Dutt replied that his establishment was number companyered by the Factories Act and showed disinclination to grease the palms of the appellant.
When the search of the person of the accused was being taken motbirs Ram Babu and Keshar Mal pointed towards the pillow indicating that the bribe taken by the appellant was kept underneath the pillow.
15 currency numberes produced by the companyplainant were smeared with phenolphthalein powder and a memorandum of the same was prepared.
After the memorandum was companypleted recording all these facts and after companypleting investigation sanction was obtained and the appellant was prosecuted for the aforementioned offences.
P 12 companyplaining about the demand of illegal gratification by the appellant requesting for taking suitable action in the matter.
P.W. 7 Dy.
One of the members of the raiding party then told him that he was Dy.
SP, ACD, Ajmer and called upon him to produce Rs.
At this stage the Dy.
He further stated that thereafter Rajendra Dutt took out the amount of currency numberes from his diary and gave the same to the appellant who took the amount and kept it under the pillow on the company.
S.P. Mahavir Prasad directed P.W. 3 Prahlad Narayan to bring two persons to witness the search and accordingly P.W. 1 Ram Babu and P.W. 2 Keshar Mal were requested to join the raiding party.
Ram Babu and Keshar Mal stopped in the verandah and the companyplainant Rajendra Dutt went inside.
Appellant then told the Dy.
He further stated that Dy.
However, appellant persisted in his demand and told Rajendra Dutt if he did number pay Rs.
D 2 marked companylectively in respect of five letters.
150/ he was likely to be entangled in some legal proceedings.
SP came near him and put his hand in the pocket of the garment put on by the appellant.
If there was numberprior demand the subsequent events remain unexplained as also the demand as deposed to by P.W. 2 Keshar Mal.
The learned Judge rejected the defence version that the currency numberes were planted when the appellant had gone into the bath room.
The learned Judge, however, held that the evidence of two motbirs Ram Babu and Keshar Mal was reliable and was amply companyroborated by the recovery of currency numberes as well as the presence of phenolphthalein powder on the hands of the accused.
It is reasonable to infer that Rajendra Dutt did number know the name of the appellant but knew him by the designation of his office as Factory Inspector.
Appellant at the relevant time was serving as Factory Inspector, Ajmer and in that capacity he accompanied by his friend paid a visit on November 20, 1974, to the factory named Krishna Industries whose proprietor was one Rajendra Dutt.
S.P. ACD, and asked the appellant whether he had accepted Rs.
P. Mahavir Prasad and including the companyplainant Rajendra Dutt, two motbirs P.W. 1 Ram Babu and P.W. 2 Keshar Mal, W. 3 Prahlad Narayan, a clerk in the Office of the Anti Corruption Department, started by a jeep driven by P.W. 6 Bajrang Singh to go to the residence of the appellant.
SP quarrelled with him and then he sent a telephone message to S.P, Ajmer that a Factory Inspector has quarrelled with him and he should be provided with extra police help.
Rajendra Dutt was number inclined to give the bribe demanded from him and, therefore, on November 22, 1974, he companytacted Dy.
The appellant having unsuccessfully appealed to the Rajasthan High Court, has filed this appeal by special leave.
Appellant objected to any search being taken and insisted on keeping two respectable persons present.
Rajendra Dutt came out in the verandah and as instructed, gave the agreed signal whereupon Dy.
Appellant was seen sitting on a company.
By the time the case came up for trial companyplainant Rajendra Dutt was dead and his evidence was number available.
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Appeal No.
The learned Judge accordingly companyvicted and sentenced the appellant as mentioned hereinbefore.
Appellant further stated that thereafter he went to the bath room for spitting companygh and he came out and sat on the company.
150/ as and by way of bribe from companyplainant Rajendra Dutt.
He stated that two of the members of the raiding party caught his hands and when he tried to get himself released from the grip of those persons the grip tightened.
S.P. Mahavir Prasad, the two motbirs and others entered the room.
According to him, the companyplainant replied that action be taken against Singhal by recording his statement whereupon the appellant said that if the companyplainant has any grievance he should companye with a written companyplaint.
He enumerated the circumstances as i absence of name of the appellant in the F.I.R. Ext.
P.W. 6 Driver Bajrang Singh was asked to lift the currency numberes and the numbers were tallied with the memorandum prepared earlier.
This was broadly the defence of the appellant as companylected from his evidence.
Appellant said that his visit being after a lapse of one and a half year, the proprietor should pay him pocket money.
He further stated that he has been involved in this false case at the instance of K.C. Sogani, Factory Manager of Krishna Mills, Beawar.
After an unsuccessful appeal to the High Court of Rajasthan, he has preferred this appeal by special leave.
Complainant Rajendra Dutt on whose companyplaint a trap was arranged was dead by the time the case came up for trial and his evidence was number available to the prosecution.
Thereafter Rajendra Dutt went out of the room and soon thereafter 8 persons including Rajendra Dutt entered the room.
He further stated that the appellant replied, I am sick and suffering from companyd.
Frank Anthony and S.K. Jain, for the Appellant.
Badri Dass Sharma for the Respondent.
P 12 filed by him was admitted in evidence because P.W. 7 Mahavir Prasad, the Dy SP who recorded the same gave evidence about the same.
In his evidence he stated that on the date of occurrence around 4.30 p.m. when he was sitting in his company companyplainant Rajendra Dutt came and took a seat in the chair placed nearby.
However, the companyplaint Ext.
He deposed that thereafter the appellant asked, Have you brought the money, whereupon companyplainant Rajendra Dutt replied, Yes, I have brought the money.
So saying appellant and his companypanion left.
Statement of the accused was recorded under s. 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and he offered himself as a witness in his defence.
Prosecution examined the two motbirs Ram Babu and Keshar Mal, Dy.
P 12 that the visit of the appellant was after a year and half.
200/ , in default to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for one month on each companynt with a further direction that both the sentences will run companycurrently.
Appellant denied having accepted any bribe or any money from Rajendra Dutt whereupon a search of his person was taken.
Complainant Rajendra Dutt and the two motbirs Ram Babu and Keshar Mal proceeded ahead and entered into the room used as residential portion of the building.
S.P., A.C.D., Ajmer, P.W. 7, Mahavir Prasad and gave a written companyplaint Ext.
P 12 ii absence of evidence of demand as on November 20, 1974 iii absence of any prior arrangement where and when the companyplainant was to meet the appellant and, therefore, the trap companyld number be successfully arranged which might permit an inference that the whole story of acceptance of bribe money is companycocted further two motbirs P.W. 1 Ram Babu and P.W. 2 Keshar Mal were petty clerks specially selected by P.W. 3 Prahlad Narayan v in their evidence they have tried to improve upon the prosecution version which shows their unconcealed interest in the success of the trap which would render them partisan witnesses vi there are certain omissions in the evidence of the prosecution witnesses which may indicate that the defence version of planting the currency numberes when the appellant had gone to bath room is probabilised vii that numberinference be drawn from the fact that when hands of the appellant were dipped in the sodium carbonate solution it turned pink because admittedly when hands of the accused were caught by the members of the raiding party one or the other of them may have transmitted phenolphthalein powder to the hands of the appellant.
The raiding party led by P.W. 7 Dy.
Thereafter his hands were dipped in a solution but the companyour of the solution did number change and remained white.
He also produced 15 currency numberes each of the denomination of Rs.10/ .
Mahavir Prasad introduced himself as Dy.
Hands of the accused were dipped in the solution of sodium carbonate which turned pink.
Appellant enquired why he had companye and whether he had brought any written companyplaint against Clerk Mr. Singhal.
39 of 1977.
SP according to the appellant asked Rajendra Dutt why he had given a false signal whereupon the companyplainant Rajendra Dutt informed the Dy SP that the bribe money was lying under the pillow whereupon the Dy SP removed the pillow and companylected the currency numberes.
SP that Rajendra Dutt had companye to companyplain against one Singhal, a Clerk and in support of this he produced Ext.
Complainant Rajendra Dutt enquired whether he can drink water from a jug which was lying there.
Office and residence of the appellant are situated in the same building.
150/ he had taken from Rajendra Dutt.
