Cbi vs . Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : ... on 22 September, 2017

[Cites 24, Cited by 0]

Delhi District Court

Cbi vs . Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : ... on 22 September, 2017

CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma                                Judgment                           Dated : 19.09.2017


  IN THE COURT OF SPECIAL JUDGE03 (P. C. ACT) (CBI),
           PATIALA HOUSE COURTS, NEW DELHI
CIS No. 88/2016
CC No. 01/15
RC No. 18A/2014/ACB/CBI/ND
CNR No. DLND010018632015
Central Bureau of Investigation
Versus
Fakir Chand Sharma
s/o Late Sh. B. R. Sharma
R/o A63, Najafgarh Park,
       Near Dichau Bus Stand,
       Najafgarh, New Delhi.

Date of filing of chargesheet         :       02.01.2015
Date of conclusion of final arguments  :       22.08.2017
Date of announcement of judgment      :        19.09.2017

JUDGMENT

1. As per CBI, this case was registered on 12.06.2014 on the basis of verification of complaint lodged with CBI by Sh. Amit Kumar. As per complaint dated 10.06.2014, the complainant was working as IT Assistant in Govt. CoEd Sr. Sec. School, Kanganheri, New Delhi71, on contract basis. He has alleged that Fakir Chand Sharma, Principal of this school was demanding a bribe of Rs.10,000/ to sign his attendances. He has also stated in the complaint that his company M/s Computer Clinic India Pvt. Ltd. needed his attendances from the school duly signed by the Principal CC No. 01/15 Page No. 1 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 to release his salary. The verification conducted on 10.06.2014 in presence of an independent witness Sh. Sunil Thapliyal, Computer Programmer, Delhi Tourism & Transport Corporation Ltd.,, Defence Colony, New Delhi confirmed the allegations alleged in the complaint as true. During verification proceedings, the conversation between the complainant and accused Fakir Chand Sharma was also recorded. Some relevant portions of the recording are as follows :

"Amit Kumar                         Sir iska
Fakir Chand                         Iska kar de 1500Rs. me
Amit Kumar                          Uska
Fakir Chand                         Uska baad me kar dena aur ab de raha ho to
                                    ab de de
Amit Kumar                          Bata do ki total kitne loge |
Fakir Chand                         Ab ye dekh lay kay.......... isme aaj 10 tarikh
                                    ho gayi 4 hi din gaya hai tu
Amit Kumar                          Nahi do hi din to hue hai
Fakir Chand                         Haa
Amit Kumar                          Ek Shaniwar ka aur ek aaj ka kal ka
Fakir Chand                         8 tarikh ka Itwar tha na
Amit Kumar                          Haa
Fakir Chand                         8 ka Itwar tha to 7 ko gaya nahi ek us ko
                                    nahi gaya tha 5 ko
Amit Kumar                          5 ko kya tha
Fakir Chand                         Message diya tha tene ke mai nahi aaunga
                                    fir aaya nahi
Amit Kumar                          To overall bata do sir jitne lagenge aur
Fakir Chand                         Dekh lay chalo 20 din ka
Amit Kumar                          Hun

CC No. 01/15                                                                                                Page No. 2 of 212
 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma                                Judgment                           Dated : 19.09.2017


Fakir Chand                         Bees din
Amit Kumar                          Aap hi bata do sir main kya bataun.........ek
                                    gilas paani pila do sir
     
     
Amit Kumar                          1500 rupay to Mayi wali attendance kay aur
                                    uska dekh lo
Fakir Chand                         Hun uska kar lenge................., chal 10000
                                    rupay dey dena dono kay iskay bhi aur
                                    uskay bhi
Amit Kumar                          Dono kay das hazar rupay aray kuch to kam
                                    kar lo kuch bachego hi nahi das hazar rupay
                                    to salary hai meri
Fakir Chand                         Bete suno, salary nahi dekhi jaati isme agar
                                    hum ye kahe na ki bhai Aayi Ti nahi aa
                                    raha, Aayi Ti nahi aa raha to vo intni jaldi

dusra bhejenge nahi aur paanchso rupay par de aap par penalty padegi |Hum to ussay aur bacha rahay hai.

Fakir Chand Tees tarikh ko tujhe puri attendance de denge bina naga kay bas Amit Kumar Pareshani to nahi hogi na sir aap dekh lo Fakir Chand Aray yaar mai jab bata raha hun mai dekho mai kagaj ki kabhi kabhi nahi chhodta kagaj me kabhi kabhi nahi chhodta bas vo hamara kaam hai hum kya karenge uski chinta mat kar Amit Kumar Mano May aur June ki attendance sign karane kay liye das hazar rupay Fakir Chand Haan vo kara lenge vo koi baat nahi Amit Kumar Das hazar rupay dene padenge sir, sir kuch to kam karo sir, das hazar rupay to bahut jyada ho jayenge | CC No. 01/15 Page No. 3 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 Fakir Chand Aray kuch jyada na hai kuch Amit Kumar Chalo sir dekh lo sir kuch to kar karo Fakir Chand Haan kar diye jab dega tab dekh lenge Amit Kumar Fir bhi sir Fakir Chand Haan jab dega tab dekh lenge.....aur lay lay Amit Kumar Thoda bahut to dekh lo sir das hazar to bahut honge Fakir Chand Kuch na hai bahut, company ko nayi company walay ka phone number de dena jab Fakir Chand Hafte me ek din aa jaa aur kar kay chala jaa Amit Kumar Chalo, sir das hazar hi dene padenge Fakir Chand Kar lo, karlo Amit Kumar Thoda bahut to kam kar lo sir Fakir Chand Kar denge, jab aayega, tab kar denge jab hi kar denge chinta mat karo Amit Kumar Fir baki aur attendance me koi dikkat nahi aayegi na sir Fakir Chand Na na na fir dikkat kaise aa jayegi hamare rehte hue fir hame kaun puchhega dikkat aayege to bata Amit Kumar Baki sir dekh lena, das hazar jyada ho jagenge sir Fakir Chand Haan haan kar denge kar denge, tujhe raaji kar denge"

2. It is further submitted that A verification memo CC No. 01/15 Page No. 4 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 was prepared. Thereafter, on the basis of verification the case was registered on 12.06.2014. A trap team under the leadership of Sh. Ramesh Kumar, Insp./CBI/ACB/Delhi consisting of other CBI officers and independent witnesses namely Sunil Thapliyal, Computer Programmer, Delhi Tourism and Sh. Dharamvir Singh, Public Relation Inspector, Department of Post Swami Ram Tirath Nagar Post Office, Delhi, was constituted. The members of teams were introduced to each other and satisfied themselves regarding the genuineness of the complaint and verification. The complainant produced the amount of Rs.10000/ which was to be given to the accused persons Fakir Chand Sharma, Principal, Govt. CoEd. Sr. Sec. School, Kanganheri, New Delhi. The number of these notes were noted down in a handing over memo which was being prepared simultaneously. The said GC notes were smeared with phenolphthalein powder and a demonstration was given to the independent witnesses and the trap team, wherein it was explained that if any part of any object or body comes in contact with the powder and if that part and body is washed in sodium carbonate solution, the colour of solution would turn pink. Thereafter, Sh. Dharamvir Singh, the independent witness was directed to touch the phenolphthalein treated GC notes and then to dip his index finger in solution of sodium CC No. 01/15 Page No. 5 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 carbonate. On doing so the colourless solution of the sodium carbonate turned pink. The said solution was thrown. A handing over memo was prepared in which all the proceedings were recorded.

3. It is further submitted that the trap team along with the above said independent witnesses and complainant reached in the vicinity of Govt. CoEd. Sr. Sec. School, Kanganheri, New Delhi where Fakir Chand Sharma was posted as Principal.

4. It is further submitted that Fakir Chand Sharma was caught red handed by CBI trap team while demanding a bribe of Rs.10000/ and accepting the bribe amount of Rs.9000/ after negotiation with the complainant. The hand washes of both the hands of the accused person when taken in freshly prepared separate solutions of sodium carbonate and water, turned pink. The tainted bribe amount accepted by Fakir Chand Sharma was recovered from the left side shirt pocket of Fakir Chand Sharma by the independent witness Sh. Dharamvir Singh. The said bribe money was counted and found to be Rs.9000/. The numbers and denomination of recovered GC notes matched with the GC notes mentioned in handing over memo. The left side shirt pocket wash of Fakir Chand Sharma also turned pink. The conversation which CC No. 01/15 Page No. 6 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 took place on the spot was also recorded in digital voice recorder and the relevant portions are reproduced below :

"Fakir Chand Acha lay aaya tankhwah tankhwah aa gayi Amit Kumar Haan, tankhwah lay aaya Fakir Chand Acha la de de..............de de Amit Kumar Kitne doo bata to do Fakir Chand de de........... das de de Amit Kumar Sir kuch to kam kar lo aap keh rahe the Fakir Chand Nahi Bete yaha ab badi dikkat ho rahi hai, ek sau..........

Amit Kumar Fir sir das me to sir kuch bhi nahi bachega pure mahina ka vaise salary bhi kam hi mili hai aapne absent bhej rakhi thi meri Fakir Chand Vo to jab teri vajah se ho gayi na, hum kaun bhej kay raji the tene keh diya ki absent bhej do ab absent pata abhi to jab tujhe...... jab ye company chhodega na jab pata chalega piche kay sare 500 rupay par de katenge usme se katenge tere jo ek mahine ki jama hogi na penalty usme se katenge | Ab to working jitne din kaam kiya utne din ki aapko degi.

Amit Kumar                          Acha
Fakir Chand                         Jab unke paas ye pahunchti hai attendance

to jitne din hai absent hote hai utne din 500 rupay par de penalty usme se kaat te hai jo tumhari deposit security deposit hoti hai Amit Kumar Fir abhi das hazar hi dene padenge Fakir Chand Das hi de tu badiya rehega, sari jimmedari hamare upar hai Amit Kumar Uppar to aapke hai sir CC No. 01/15 Page No. 7 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 Fakir Chand Haan sari jitni alaa balaa hai jitni Amit Kumar Sir kuch to kam kar so sir, thoda bahut to rehm khao Fakir Chand 500 kam de Amit Kumar 500 hi chhodoge sir Fakir Chand Aur kya karu, badi dikkat hai na dekho, mujhe hi pata hai ki kya kya dikkat aa sakti hai, humne inko keh rakha hai bhai training me gaya hua hai, teri training ka vo banwa ke dena padega, maine ek se baat kar li kal aa gaya tha yaha admission ke liye Amit Kumar Acha Fakir Chand Haan Amit Kumar Kya keh raha, likh ke de dunga Fakir Chand Haan, maine kaha ray ek aadmi ki training ka bana dena computer ki training uski skill development ka program kiya......(aspashta) Amit Kumar Uske baad to koi pareshani nahi Fakir Chand Na na aray teri to koi pareshani nahi hai jab hum attendance puri de denge tujhe to kahi dikkat hi nahi hun pura record karke denge aur tujhe puri till date 30 June tak ki attendance denge aur jo company ke hum certificate likhenge na aur to abhi mat likhwao 30 June tak ka to 30 June ko likh jayenge 2 July se 30 June tak inhone is school me kaam kiya, work inka jo hai satisfactory raha aur matlab cooperative nature and work done satisfactory from this date to this date Amit Kumar Sir attendance sign karne ke liye sir das hazar Fakir Chand Tu 9 de de yaar jyada mat bol.......

CC No. 01/15 Page No. 8 of 212

CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 Amit Kumar Sir fifty percent salary sir to mili hai aapke paas hi chali jayegi Fakir Chand Haan haan penalty teri bach rahi hai abhi isme to tera kaam to nahi kar raha na ........ fifty ........ 500 repay par de to vo bach rahi hai teri penalty nahi tere to pichhli June ki tankhwah bhi nahi dete, ek mahine ki aapki jo deposit hai vo bhi kaat te June me 30 June ko jo hisab karte June ki tankhwah aur vo laga ke do mahine ki me se jo bachta vo dete aapko.... kyoki bade badmash hote hai ye company wale Amit Kumar Vo to hai sir Fakir Chand Haan Amit Kumar 9 de du fir Fakir Chand Haan 2 de de"

5. It is further submitted that these conversations established demand of bribe of Rs.10,000/ on spot by the accused and also acceptance of Rs.9.000/ by him. The accused was arrested by CBI on 12.06.2014 i.e. on the day of trap.

6. It is further submitted that the investigation has revealed that an agreement regarding providing of IT assistant of 500 Govt. schools had taken placed on 19th June 2012 between Directorate of Education and M/s Computer Clinic India Pvt. Ltd. As per the agreement, M/s Computer Clinic India Pvt. Ltd. was to provide IT Assistants for a period of one year starting from 01.07.2012. This tender was for CC No. 01/15 Page No. 9 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 one year extendable for further period on mutual understanding of both the parties. As per the terms of this agreement the payment was to be made on monthly basis on the basis of monthly Attendance/Performance Report from the respective Heads of Schools received through the Contractor Company. The Contractor Company was to submit their monthly bill pertaining to the work done by the Contractor Company in the last month along with the Attendance/Performance Reports of all the I.T. Assistants certified/attested by the respective Head of Schools. The Contractor Company shall make payment to the I.T. Assistants within one week of release of payment to the Contractor Company by the Department of Education.

7. It is further submitted that the investigation also revealed that Sh. Amit Kumar, the complainant was working with M/s Computer Clinic India Pvt. Ltd. and was attached with Government Coed Senior Secondary School Kanganheri. Fakir Chand Sharma was Principal of this school. As per the terms of agreement Fakir Chand Sharma being the head of the school used to certify the attendance/performance report of Sh. Amit Kumar.

8. It is further submitted that the exhibits taken during investigation of the case were sent to CFSL for CC No. 01/15 Page No. 10 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 opinion. The chemical examination report of CFSL in respect of exhibits LHW, RHW and left side shirt pocket was of Fakir Chand Sharma give positive results about presence of phenolphthalein. The report in respect of the voice recording is still awaited. The same will be submitted when received from CFSL.

9. It is further submitted that investigation has clearly established that the accused Fakir Chand Sharma was demanding a bribe of Rs.10,000/ and was caught red handed while accepting the bribe of Rs.9000/ from the complainant.

10. It is further submitted that the aforesaid facts and circumstances disclose commission of offence on part of accused Fakir Chand Sharma, Principal Government Coed Senior Secondary School, Kanganheri, New Delhi under Section 7 and 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of P. C. Act. The sanction under Section 19 of P. C. Act 1988 accorded by the sanctioning authority for prosecution of Fakir Chand Sharma is also enclosed.

CHARGE

11. After hearing the arguments of the parties, charge was framed on 17.03.2015 against the accused Fakir Chand CC No. 01/15 Page No. 11 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 Sharma for the offence under Section 7 and 13 (2) r/w Section 13 (1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

Prosecution evidence

12. Prosecution examined in all 15 witnesses, as per list below :

  S. No.             PWs                                        Name of Witnesses
      1.             PW1           Sh. Amit Kumar, Complainant, R/o RZ22, Baba

Haridas Nagar, Ekta Vihar, Gali No. 2, A Block, Near New Anaz Mandi, Najafgarh, Delhi.

2. PW2 Sh. Binay Bhushan, Additional Director of Education (Vig.), Old Secretariat Building, New Delhi.

3. PW3 Sh. V. B. Ramteke, Sr. Scientifc Officer, GradeI (Chemistry), CFSL, New Delhi.

4. PW4 Sh. Anuj Bhatia, Nodal Officer, Vodafone Mobile Services Ltd., Okhla PhaseII, New Delhi

5. PW5 Sh. Sunil Thapliyal, Computer Programmer, DTDC Ltd., Defence Colony, New Delhi.

6. PW6 Sh. Dharamvir Singh S/o Sh. Jugti Ram, R/o Village Bhawa Pur, District Sonepat, Haryana.

7. PW7 Sh. Ashish Tomar S/o Ompal Singh, Working as:

LDC, DDA Vikas Sadan, INA, New Delhi

8. PW8 Sh. Arjun Kumar Maurya, Inspector, CBI/ACB/ New Delhi

9. PW9 Sh. Ramesh Kumar, Inspector, CBI/ACB/ New Delhi

10. PW10 Sh. Deepak Kumar Tanwar, Sr. Scientific Officer, GradeI (Physics), CFSL, CBI, New Delhi.

CC No. 01/15 Page No. 12 of 212

CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017

11. PW11 Sh. Rajiv Rathi, Director of M/s Computer Clinic India Pvt. Ltd.

12. PW12 Sh. K. K. Malhotra, Accounts Officer, Sports Branch, Directorate of Education

13. PW13 Sh. Rajeev Ranjan, Nodal Officer, TATA Tele Services, Old Ishwar Nagar, Main Mathura Road, New Delhi 65

14. PW14 Sh. Om Prakash, VicePrincipal, Govt. Coed, SSS, Kanganheri, New Delhi 71

15. PW15 Sh. Guru Sewak, Inspector, CBI/ACB/ND and presently posted at Legal Cell, Police Headquarter, Delhi Statement u/Sec. 313 Cr.PC of accused

13. Statement of accused recorded under Section 313 of Cr.PC, wherein he denied the incriminating evidence against him.

14. PW1 Sh. Amit Kumar has deposed that he was working as IT Assistant in Govt. CoEducation Sr. Secondary School, Kanganheri New Delhi from July 2012 to 30 th June 2014. It is further deposed by PW1 that at that time, accused Fakir Chand Sharma was working as Principal of the aforesaid school. He has identified the accused Fakir Chand Sharma by his name and face. It is further deposed by PW1 that he was working in the above said school as IT Assistant on contract basis through M/s Computer Clinic India Pvt.

CC No. 01/15 Page No. 13 of 212

CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 Ltd., situated at 301A, Rajdhani Enclave, Near Preet Vihar Metro Station, Delhi110092. As per the terms and conditions of the agreement, he used to work in the school as IT Assistant but his attendance has to be sent by the school to his above said company for release of his monthly salary. It is further deposed by PW1 that he used to go to meet the accused Fakir Chand Sharma being the Principal of the school to ask and make an enquiry regarding sending of his attendance to his company M/s Computer Clinic India Pvt. Ltd for release of his salary on 2nd day of each English Calender Month but accused Fakir Chand Sharma used to demand money from him for sending his attendance.

15. It is further deposed by PW1 that in the month of June, 2014 as and when he went to the office of accused Fakir Chand Sharma being Principal of the above said school for sending his attendance at that time he uttered to him 'mujhe kya fayada hai tere se, kewal do ghante kaam hota hai' and he demanded a sum of Rs.10,000/ from him but his monthly salary was only Rs.10,400/ at that time. Thereafter, on 10.06.2014, he went to the CBI office to make the complaint against accused Fakir Chand Sharma for demanding a sum of Rs.10,000/ from him.

16. It is further deposed by PW1 that when he gave CC No. 01/15 Page No. 14 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 his written complaint in this respect to CBI, then they asked him as to what is the truth in his complaint and to verify the truthness of his complaint, the CBI official appointed one SI Arjun Kumar Maurya to get verify the above said facts of his complaint. On the same day i.e. 10.06.2014, he alongwith CBI SI Arjun Kumar Maurya and one more independent witness Sunil Thapliyal went to the residence of accused Fakir Chand Sharma situated at Najafgarh, Delhi. He left the CBI office alongwith independent witness and CBI Inspector at about 12.15 p.m on 10.06.2014 and before leaving CBI office, he made a call to accused Fakir Chand Sharma and he assured him that he will meet him at his residence after about one hour from the time of making a call to him by him (PW1) and the said call was recorded by the CBI official in CBI office in the presence of independent witness Sunil Thapliyal. It is further deposed by PW1 that thereafter, he alongwith CBI Inspector Arjun Kumar Maurya and independent witness Sunil Thapliyal reached Najafgarh in the vehicle of CBI at about 1.30 p.m. vehicle, he again made a call to accused Fakir Chand Sharma as to whether he has reached at his house or not and he confirmed that now he reached at his house and available there and this conversation was also recorded by the CBI. Thereafter, DVR was put in his pocket by CBI Inspector Arjun Kumar Maurya and then he was directed CC No. 01/15 Page No. 15 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 alongwith Independent witness Sunil Thapliyal to go to the house of Fakir Chand Sharma. It is further deposed by PW1 that they reached at the house of Fakir Chand Sharma within 2 minutes from the place where CBI vehicle was parked. When he rang the door bell of the house of Fakir Chand Sharma, accused Fakir Chand Sharma opened the main door of his house and after seeing him, independent witness Sunil Thapliyal went ahead and he entered in his house.

17. It is further deposed by PW1 that at the house of the accused, conversation took place regarding other staff of the school between him and the accused Fakir Chand Sharma and he handed over him, PW1's attendance sheet after signing the same by him. At the time of handing over of the attendance sheet to accused, accused Fakir Chand Sharma told PW1 that he will recommend his name to his company for the further period because the contract with his above said company was going to be ended and he also disclosed that the boy who has already worked with him was also asking him to recommend his name. It is further deposed by PW1 that at that time, the accused demanded a sum of Rs.10,000/ from him for signing his attendance sheet for which PW1 stated him that his total monthly salary is Rs.10,400/ and as to how PW1 could give him such a big CC No. 01/15 Page No. 16 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 amount. Even though Fakir Chand Sharma stated that PW1 has means to arrange the said amount to give him. It is further deposed by PW1 that after the above said conversation, PW1 assured accused Fakir Chand Sharma to arrange a sum of Rs.10,000/ for him within one or two days and he gave PW1 the said time. Thereafter, PW1 came out from the house of Fakir Chand Sharma and after some distance independent witness Sunil Thapliyal also met PW1 and then PW1 accompanied him and reached at the CBI vehicle where SI Arjun Kr Maurya was present and he collected the voice recorder from PW1 and he immediately switched it off and thereafter they left Najafgarh for CBI office at about 2 p.m and reached in the CBI office at about 3 or 3.15 p.m.

18. It is further deposed by PW1 that thereafter, the recording was heard by the CBI officer as well as PW1 and the independent witness in the CBI office, which revealed the demand of Rs.10,000/. Thereafter, CBI officers asked PW1 to arrange a sum of Rs.10,000/. PW1 asked them to give him one or two days time to arrange the said amount.

19. It is further deposed by PW1 that thereafter, on 12.06.2014 at about 7 a.m., PW1 again visited the office of CBI alongwith Rs.10,000/ which were in denomination of CC No. 01/15 Page No. 17 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 Rs.1000/ each GC notes. Thereafter, another CBI officer Ramesh took the said Rs.10,000/ from PW1 and he made the details of the said notes. At that time, two independent witnesses Dharambir Singh and Sunil Thapliyal were also present in the office and said notes were also shown to them by the CBI officers in the presence of PW1. Thereafter, the said notes were smeared with some powder and demonstration was given to PW1 and the independent witnesses and independent witness Dharambir Singh was asked to touch the said notes and thereafter he was asked to wash his hand and when he washed his hand, the water changed into pink colour. Then the CBI officials thrown the said water. On that day, PW1 had taken his own vehicle/car make Maruti Suzuki Swift and as per the direction of CBI official, one independent witness, Sunil Thapliyal alongwith SI Arjun Kumar Maurya sat in PW1's car and other CBI officials and other independent witness Dharambir were in another CBI vehicle and then they all left the CBI office at about 7.30 a.m to proceed to Govt. CoEducation Sr. Secondary School, Kaganheri, New Delhi71. It is further deposed by PW1 that when PW1 reached near IGI Airport, then the accused Fakir Chand Sharma gave him missed call on his mobile phone no. 9711491499 from his mobile phone. PW1 immediately disclosed this fact to CBI SI Arjun Kumar CC No. 01/15 Page No. 18 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 Maurya. On this, they parked their vehicle aside on the road and then SI Arjun Kumar Maurya called another CBI officer Ramesh from another vehicle and disclosed this fact to him and then CBI officer Ramesh, switch on the DVR and asked PW1 to call accused Fakir Chand Sharma. Then PW1 made a call to accused Fakir Chand Sharma from his mobile by putting his mobile in speaker mode. From the other side, accused Fakir Chand Sharma asked PW1 as to how much time he would take to reach the school. At some distance from the school in question of accused, the DVR was put in PW1's front pocket of the shirt by the CBI officers to record the conversation between him and the accused. They reached at the Govt. CoEd. Sr. School, Kanganheri New Delhi at about 9.30 a.m. The CBI officials remained present outside the school with Dharambir Singh and another independent witness got down from his car outside the school gate. PW1 went in his car inside the school and independent witness Sunil Thapliyal followed him on foot at that time inside the school. PW1 went to the office of the school where PW1 paid regards to the staff members by saying good morning. In the meantime, independent witness Sunil Thapliyal went to the accused Fakir Chand Sharma, Principal to make an enquiry regarding admission. At that time, the accused was sitting on cot in the varanda of the school near the principal CC No. 01/15 Page No. 19 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 room/office. PW1 also went to the accused Fakir Chand Sharma and PW1 was directed to go to the another nearby school to get the print out the circular and email as there was no electricity in the school at that time. It is further deposed by PW1 that PW1 also sat on the chair brought by him from the school and sat on the chair near the accused Fakir Chand Sharma. During the conversation of demanding amount by the accused, PW1 disclosed him that such demanded amount was so huge for him. But the accused stated that there were too expensive things now a days in the market so the accused could not do anything. First, the accused disclosed 9,500/ demanded from him then he again made request to reduce the said amount more, then he told to PW1 that now he will take Rs.9,000/ and not less than the said amount. Thereafter, PW1 took out Rs.10,000/ from his pocket and after taking out one note of Rs.1000/ from the said amount, remaining amount of Rs.9,000/ was handed over to accused Fakir Chand Sharma by him and he hold the said amount in his left hand and immediately kept the same in his front pocket of his shirt. PW1 made request to count the same but the accused stated that it was not required. Thereafter, PW1 asked the accused to complete the work assigned by him to PW1 and PW1 informed the CBI officials from his mobile phone from the distance of 20 steps away from the place CC No. 01/15 Page No. 20 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 where the accused was sitting on a cot. Thereafter CBI official Ramesh alongwith other CBI official and independent witness Sh. Dharamveer Singh came inside the school and those were followed by CBI SI Arjun Kumar Maurya. At that time the accused was sitting on the cot in such a position that the cot was between in two legs, one leg on other side and the accused was apprehended and caught hold by his hand above the wrist below the knee by Ramesh and another CBI official from each hand was directed to sit on the cot. Thereafter other officials who also accompanied them, one of them took out the DVR from his pocket and switched it off and they took out their identity cards of CBI and showed to accused that they were the officers of CBI to which the accused could not understand and took it in a funny way and he started laughing on them. It is further deposed by PW1 that when the entire team of CBI reached near the accused, they asked to go inside the Principal room, but the accused asked them to finish the matter there itself by taking something (kuchch le dekar). The other staff of the school came to the spot. The CBI officials also gave their introduction to the other staff of the school. Thereafter, the Vice Principal Sh. Om Prakash was also called by the CBI officials and he was told each and every thing by the CBI officials. Thereafter, CBI officials directed the independent witness Dharambir Singh to take out the bribe CC No. 01/15 Page No. 21 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 money from the pocket of accused Fakir Chand Sharma and he took out the same. The vice principal Om Prakash arranged water there. Thereafter, the hand washes of the accused were taken separately and on doing so, the colour of the water turned into pink. The said water was then transferred in the separate bottles and sealed with the seal of CBI. Thereafter, the pocket washes of the shirt worn by accused Fakir Chand Sharma were taken. On doing so, the colour of the pocket of the shirt was changed into pink. The said washes were also transferred into glass bottle and were sealed with the seal of CBI. The shirt worn by the accused was sealed with the seal of CBI. The nine GC notes recovered from the accused were tallied with the numbers of the GC notes mentioned in the memo. They tallied in toto. Thereafter, PW1 handed over one GC note to the CBI officer. The CBI officer sealed those GC notes. Thereafter the proceedings were drawn. After sealing the bottles, shirt and other material, the seal was handed over to the independent witness.

20. PW1 has identified his signatures on his complaint dated 10.06.2014 Ex.PW1/A, at point A.

21. It is further deposed by PW1 that verification report Ex.PW1/B (D3 page 11 to 14) in CO CC No. 01/15 Page No. 22 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 53/14/CBI/ACB/ND dated 10.06.2014 bears his signatures at point A on each page consisting of four pages. Handing over memo Ex.PW1/C (D4 page 15 to 18) in case RCDAI2014 A0018 dated 12.06.2014 bears his signatures at point A. Recovery memoEx.PW1/D (D5 page 19 to 37) in case RC DAI2014A0018 dated 12.06.2014 bears his signatures at point A. Rough site Ex.PW1/E (D6 page 38) plan in case RCDAI2014A0018 dated 12.06.2014 bears his signatures at point A. Thereafter, he again visited the office of CBI on 17.07.2014. The investigation copy of the recorded conversation which took place between the accused and PW1 during verification proceedings and the trap proceeding was played. PW1 identified his voice as well as the voice of accused Fakir Chand Sharma on that day and CBI officers prepared the transcript of the same and drawn voice identification memo Ex.PW1/F (D35 Page 289) dated 17.07.2014 which bears his signatures at point A. The rough transcription of the recorded conversation Ex.PW1/G (D36 page 290 to 311), which took place between the accused and PW1 on 10.06.2014 bears his signatures at point A on each page.

22. It is further deposed by PW1 that the rough transcription of the recorded conversation which took place CC No. 01/15 Page No. 23 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 between the accused and PW1 on 12.06.2014 is Ex.PW1/H (D37 page 312 to 328) which bears his signatures at point A on each page.

23. It is further deposed by PW1 that the application for allotment of telephone number bearing 9711491499 bears his photograph at point 'A' and his signatures at point 'B', for obtaining the aforesaid number. PW1 has enclosed attested copy of his election Icard which bears his signatures at point 'A'. The application for obtaining telephone number is Ex.PW1/J (colly.) (D39 page 330, 331).

24. It is further deposed by PW1 that one yellow colour envelope Ex.PW1/K bears his signatures at point A.

25. It is further deposed by PW1 that he identified said yellow colour envelope, found containing nine GC notes of Rs.1000/ each in denomination. After tallying the said GC notes from the recovery memo Ex.PW1/D, PW1 has stated that these were the same GC notes which were handed over by him to accused Fakir Chand Sharma and recovered from him. The said GC notes are colly. Ex.PW1/L.

26. It is further deposed by PW1 that the khakhi colour envelope bears his signatures at point A. The envelope is Ex.PW1/M and on opening it is found containing one GC CC No. 01/15 Page No. 24 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 note of Rs.1000/ in denomination and after seeing the same and from tallying with the handing over memo Ex.PW1/C, PW1 has stated that this is the same GC note which was handed over by PW1 including Rs.10,000/ to CBI and left the same after negotiation took place between PW1 and accused agreed to accept Rs.9000/ only on account of that PW1 kept this GC note and handed over Rs.9000/ only to accused. The said GC note is Ex.PW1/N.

27. PW1 has identified three glass bottles sealed with the seal of VVR CHEM DIV CFSL CBI New Delhi bearing mark Ex.RHW, Ex.LHW and Ex.Left Side Shirt Pocket Wash. The said bottles bears signatures of PW1 at point A and are now Ex.PW1/P, Ex.PW1/Q and Ex.PW1/R. After seeing the same, witness stated that these are the same bottles in which the right hand wash, left hand wash and left side shirt pocket wash were transferred by the CBI after taking the left hand wash, right hand wash and left side shirt pocket wash.

28. PW1 has identified one cloth pullanda bearing no. RCDAI2014A0018 sealed with the seal of CBI.ACB.ND65.2013. The cloth pullanda bears his signatures at point A and the same is Ex.PW1/S. It is found containing one half sleeves checkdar shirt with blue, green, creamish colour. The pocket of the shirt bears his signature at point 'A' CC No. 01/15 Page No. 25 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 and the shirt is Ex.PW1/T. After seeing the same, he has stated that this is the same shirt which was worn by the accused on 12.06.2014.

29. PW1 has stated that he can identify his voice as well as the voice of the accused Fakir Chand Sharma which was recorded during conversation by CBI in DVR.

30. PW1 has identified yellow colour envelope sealed with the seal of SSOI(PHY)CFSL(CBI) New Delhi DKT. It is found containing another paper envelope of khakhi colour, the khakhi colour envelope bears his signatures at point A, the same is Ex.PW1/U. On opening the khakhi colour envelope, it is found containing a micro SD memory Card 4 GB Make Kingston kept in its plastic cover. The memory card is taken out from its plastic cover. The same is played on laptop make Sony Vaio through Forensic Card reader with the help of Assistant Programmer Sh. Sushil Kumar CBI ACB New Delhi. The same is played in the open court on laptop in the presence of accused as well as his counsel Ms. Ruhi Saxena Advocate.

31. It is further deposed by PW1 that on opening the memory in the laptop it was found containing a folder titled 'Private'. On opening the folder tilted 'private', it is found CC No. 01/15 Page No. 26 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 containing another folder titled 'sony'. On opening the folder 'sony', it is found containing another folder named 'voice'. On opening the folder 'voice' it is found containing five folders titled folder 01, folder 02, folder 03, folder 04 and folder 05. On opening folder 01, it is found containing four audio files bearing no. 140610_001.MP3, 140610_002.MP3, 140610

003.MP3 & 140610_004.mp3.

32. It is further deposed by PW1 that the first file 140610_001.MP3 was played. After hearing the file, witness states that this is the introductory voice of witness Sunil Thapliyal. The transcript of the same is at point A to A1 in the transcript Ex.PW1/G.

33. It is further deposed by PW1 that the second file 140610_002.MP3 is played. After playing and hearing the voice, the witness stated that he is in the conversation with accused Fakir Chand Sharma. The transcript of the same is at point B to B1 in the transcript Ex.PW1/G. The word spoken by PW1 are shown in the transcript against his name "Amit Kumar" and the word spoken by accused Fakir Chand Sharma are shown by his name "Fakir Chand".

34. It is further deposed by PW1 that the third file 140610_003.MP3 is played. After playing and hearing the CC No. 01/15 Page No. 27 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 voice, the witness stated that he is in the conversation with accused Fakir Chand Sharma. The transcript of the same is at point C to C1 in the transcript Ex.PW1/G. The word spoken by PW1 are shown in the transcript against his name "Amit Kumar" and the word spoken by accused Fakir Chand Sharma are shown by his name "Fakir Chand".

35. It is further deposed by PW1 that the fourth file 140610_004.MP3 is played. After playing and hearing the voice, the witness stated that he is in the conversation with accused Fakir Chand Sharma on 10.06.2014. The transcript of the same is at point D to D1 in the transcript Ex.PW1/G. The word spoken by PW1 are shown in the transcript against his name "Amit Kumar" and the word spoken by accused Fakir Chand Sharma are shown by his name "Fakir Chand".

36. It is further deposed by PW1 that on opening the folder 02, folder 03, folder 04 and folder 05, they were found empty. The memory card is taken out from the laptop, the same is Ex.PW1/U1.

37. PW1 has identified yellow colour envelope sealed with the seal of SSOI(PHY)CFSL(CBI) New Delhi DKT. The same is opened and found containing another paper envelope of khakhi colour. On opening the khakhi colour envelope, it is CC No. 01/15 Page No. 28 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 found containing a micro SD memory Card mark Q2, 4 GB, Make Kingston kept in its plastic cover. The memory card is taken out from its plastic cover and the same is played on laptop make Sony Vaio through Forensic Card reader with the help of Assistant Programmer Sh. Sushil Kumar CBI ACB New Delhi. The same is played in the open court on laptop in the presence of accused as well as his counsel Ms. Ruhi Saxena Advocate.

38. It is further deposed by PW1 that on opening the memory card in the laptop it was found containing a folder titled 'Private'. On opening the folder tilted 'private', it is found containing another folder titled 'sony'. On opening the folder 'sony', it is found containing another folder named 'voice'. On opening the folder 'voice' it is found containing five folders titled folder 01, folder 02, folder 03, folder 04 and folder 05. On opening folder 01, it is found containing four audio files bearing no. 140612_001.MP3, 140612_002.MP3, 140612_003.MP3 & 140612_004.mp3.

39. It is further deposed by PW1 that the first file 140612_001.MP3 is played. After hearing the file, witness states that this is the introductory voice of witness Sunil Thapliyal. The transcript of the same is at point A to A1 in the transcript Ex.PW1/H. CC No. 01/15 Page No. 29 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017

40. It is further deposed by PW1 that second file 140612_002.MP3 is played. After hearing the file, witness states that this is the introductory voice of witness Dharambir Singh. The transcript of the same is at point B to B1 in the transcript Ex.PW1/H.

41. It is further deposed by PW1 that third file 140612_003.MP3 is played. After hearing the file, witness states that he is in the conversation with accused Fakir Chand Sharma. The transcript of the same is at point C to C1 in the transcript Ex.PW1/H. The word spoken by PW1 are shown in the transcript against his name "Amit Kumar" and the word spoken by accused Fakir Chand Sharma are shown by his name "Fakir Chand".

42. It is further deposed by PW1 that fourth file 140612_004.MP3 is played. After hearing the file, witness states that he is in the conversation with accused Fakir Chand Sharma on 12.06.2014. The transcript of the same is at point D to D1 in the transcript Ex.PW1/H. The word spoken by PW1 are shown in the transcript against his name "Amit Kumar" and the word spoken by accused Fakir Chand Sharma are shown by his name "Fakir Chand". In between the conversation, there is some dialogue spoken by witness Sunil Thapliyal, the dialogue spoken by him are shown by his name CC No. 01/15 Page No. 30 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 'Sunil'.

43. It is further deposed by PW1 that on opening the folder 02, folder 03, folder 04 and folder 05, they were found empty. The memory card is taken out from the laptop, the same is Ex.PW1/U2 and the khakhi envelope is Ex.PW1/U3.

44. It is further deposed by PW1 that he can identify his voice as well as the voice of the voice of accused Fakir Chand Sharma which was recorded during conversation by CBI in DVR.

45. PW1 has identified yellow colour envelope sealed with the seal of SSOI(PHY)CFSL(CBI) New Delhi DKT. The same is opened and found containing another paper envelope of khakhi colour, the khakhi colour envelope bears his signatures at point A, the same is Ex.PW1/U. On opening the khakhi colour envelope, it is found containing a micro SD memory Card 4 GB Make Kingston kept in its plastic cover. The memory card is taken out from its plastic cover and the same is played on laptop make Sony Vaio through Forensic Card reader with the help of Assistant Programmer Sh. Sushil Kumar CBI ACB New Delhi. The same is played in the open court on laptop in the presence of accused as well as his counsel Ms. Ruhi Saxena, Advocate.

CC No. 01/15 Page No. 31 of 212

CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017

46. PW1 has identified the memory card in the laptop, it was found containing a folder titled 'Private'. On opening the folder tilted 'private', it is found containing another folder titled 'sony'. On opening the folder 'sony', it is found containing another folder named 'voice'. On opening the folder 'voice', it is found containing five folders titled folder 01, folder 02, folder 03, folder 04 and folder 05. On opening folder 01, it is found containing four audio files bearing no. 140610_001.MP3, 140610_002.MP3, 140610

003.MP3 & 140610_004.mp3.

47. It is further deposed by PW1 that the first file 140610_001.MP3 was played. After hearing the file, witness states that this is the introductory voice of witness Sunil Thapliyal. The transcript of the same is at point A to A1 in the transcript Ex.PW1/G.

48. It is further deposed by PW1 that the second file 140610_002.MP3 was played. After playing and hearing the voice, the witness stated that he is in the conversation with accused Fakir Chand Sharma. The transcript of the same is at point B to B1 in the transcript Ex.PW1/G. The word spoken by PW1 are shown in the transcript against his name "Amit Kumar" and the word spoken by accused Fakir Chand Sharma are shown by his name "Fakir Chand".

CC No. 01/15 Page No. 32 of 212

CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017

49. It is further deposed by PW1 that the third file 140610_003.MP3 was played. After playing and hearing the voice, the witness stated that he is in the conversation with accused Fakir Chand Sharma. The transcription of the same is at point C to C1 in the transcript Ex.PW1/G. The word spoken by PW1 are shown in the transcription against his name "Amit Kumar" and the word spoken by accused Fakir Chand Sharma are shown by his name "Fakir Chand".

50. It is further deposed by PW1 that the fourth file 140610_004.MP3 was played. After playing and hearing the voice, the witness stated that he is in the conversation with accused Fakir Chand Sharma on 10.06.2014. The transcription of the same is at point D to D1 in the transcript Ex.PW1/G. The word spoken by PW1 are shown in the transcription against his name "Amit Kumar" and the word spoken by accused Fakir Chand Sharma are shown by his name "Fakir Chand".

51. It is further deposed by PW1 that on opening the folder 02, folder 03, folder 04 and folder 05, they were found empty. The memory card is taken out from the laptop, the same is Ex.PW1/U1.

52. PW1 has identified yellow colour envelope sealed CC No. 01/15 Page No. 33 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 with the seal of SSOI(PHY)CFSL(CBI) New Delhi DKT. The same is opened and found containing another paper envelope of khakhi colour. On opening the khakhi colour envelope, it is found containing a micro SD memory Card mark Q2, 4 GB, Make Kingston kept in its plastic cover. The memory card is taken out from its plastic cover and the same is played on laptop make Sony Vaio through Forensic Card reader with the help of Assistant Programmer Sh. Sushil Kumar CBI ACB New Delhi. The same is played in the open court on laptop in the presence of accused as well as his counsel Ms. Ruhi Saxena Advocate.

53. It is further deposed by PW1 that on opening the memory card in the laptop it was found containing a folder titled 'Private'. On opening the folder tilted 'private', it is found containing another folder titled 'sony'. On opening the folder 'sony', it is found containing another folder named 'voice'. On opening the folder 'voice' it is found containing five folders titled folder 01, folder 02, folder 03, folder 04 and folder 05. On opening folder 01, it is found containing four audio files bearing no. 140612_001.MP3, 140612_002.MP3, 140612_003.MP3 & 140612_004.mp3.

54. It is further deposed by PW1 that the first file 140612_001.MP3 was played. After hearing the file, witness CC No. 01/15 Page No. 34 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 states that this is the introductory voice of witness Sunil Thapliyal. The transcript of the same is at point A to A1 in the transcript Ex.PW1/H.

55. It is further deposed by PW1 that second file 140612_002.MP3 is played. After hearing the file, witness states that this is the introductory voice of witness Dharambir Singh. The transcript of the same is at point B to B1 in the transcript Ex.PW1/H.

56. It is further deposed by PW1 that third file 140612_003.MP3 is played. After hearing the file, witness stated that he is in the conversation with accused Fakir Chand Sharma. The transcript of the same is at point C to C1 in the transcript Ex.PW1/H. The word spoken by PW1 are shown in the transcript against his name "Amit Kumar" and the word spoken by accused Fakir Chand Sharma are shown by his name "Fakir Chand".

57. It is further deposed by PW1 that fourth file 140612_004.MP3 is played. After hearing the file, witness states that he is in the conversation with accused Fakir Chand Sharma on 12.06.2014. The transcript of the same is at point D to D1 in the transcript Ex.PW1/H. The word spoken by PW1 are shown in the transcript against his name Amit CC No. 01/15 Page No. 35 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 Kumar and the word spoken by accused Fakir Chand Sharma are shown by his name "Fakir Chand". In between the conversation, there is some dialogue spoken by witness Sunil Thapliyal, the dialogue spoken by him are shown by his name "Sunil".

58. It is further deposed by PW1 that on opening the folder 02, folder 03, folder 04 and folder 05, they were found empty. The memory card is taken out from the laptop, the same is Ex.PW1/U2 and the khakhi envelope is Ex.PW1/U3.

59. PW5 Sh. Sunil Thapliyal has deposed that In June 2014, he was working as Computer Programmer, Delhi Tourism & Development Corporation Ltd., Defence Colony, New Delhi.

60. It is further deposed by PW5 that he had attended the office of CBI on 10.06.2014, on the directions given by his Chief Manager (Personnel). Accordingly, he visited CBI office at Lodhi Road, New Delhi and met SI A.K. Maurya, who introduced him with Sh. Amit Kumar, who lodged a complaint regarding demand of illegal gratification of Rs.10,000/ by Sh. Fakir Chand Sharma, Principal of Govt. CoEduction Sr. Secondary School, Village Kanganheri, New Delhi.

CC No. 01/15 Page No. 36 of 212

CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017

61. It is further deposed by PW5 that he had gone through the complaint. Sh. Arjun Maurya wanted to verify the complaint, filed by the complainant Sh. Amit Kumar and in order to verify the complaint, a DVR was arranged by Sh. A.K. Maurya and an external memory card was inserted in it and after ensuring that it does not contain any prerecorded conversation, his introductory voice was recorded in the memory card. Thereafter, it was decided to make a call to Principal, Fakir Chand Sharma from the mobile of complainant Sh. Amit Kumar and a call was made. It was informed by the Principal, Fakir Chand Sharma that he was coming to his residence and asked the complainant to reach at his residence. This call was simultaneously recorded in the DVR by keeping the mobile on the speaker mode.

62. It is further deposed by PW5 that thereafter, he alongwith Insp. A.K. Maurya, complainant Sh. Amit Kumar went to Najafgarh in an official vehicle. On reaching there, complainant Sh. Amit Kumar informed them that he (accused) will not talk with the complainant (PW1) in presence of someone. As such, it was decided to put the DVR in the pocket of complainant Sh. Amit Kumar after switching it on. Complainant Sh. Amit Kumar entered into the residence of Fakir Chand Sharma. After 15 to 20 minutes, complainant CC No. 01/15 Page No. 37 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 Sh. Amit Kumar came back from the residence of accused Fakir Chand Sharma. Sh. A.K.Maurya, SI took back the DVR from the complainant and switched it off. Thereafter, they left the residence of Principal, Fakir Chand Sharma and came back to the office of CBI and the recorded conversation in the DVR was heard with the help of laptop, which confirmed the demand of illegal gratification to the tune of Rs.10,000/ on the part of Principal, Fakir Chand Sharma.

63. It is further deposed by PW5 that thereafter, the memory card was taken out from the DVR and it was sealed with the seal of CBI and the seal was handed over to him for its safe custody. Thereafter, some documents were also prepared.

64. It is further deposed by PW5 that he has been shown the Verification Report in CO53/14/CBI/ACB/New Delhi, which bears his signatures at point 'B', on each page, which is Ex.PW1/B. After seeing the same, he has stated that this is the same document, which was prepared by Sh. A.K. Maurya, SI, CBI, New Delhi on 10.06.2014. He and the complainant were directed by Sh. A.K.Maurya, SI to attend the CBI office on 12.06.2014 early in the morning at about 06:30 a.m. CC No. 01/15 Page No. 38 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017

65. It is further deposed by PW5 that on 12.06.2014, he reached CBI office at about 06:30 a.m. He was introduced with a trap team in which there were witness Dharambir and some 4--5 CBI officials, including complainant.

66. It is further deposed by PW5 that thereafter, the complainant produced the bribe money of a sum of Rs.10,000/, which he had brought with him in the form of 10 Government Currency (GC) notes of Rs.1,000/ each in denomination. Some powder was sprinkled on the said GC notes. Independent witness Sh. Dharambir Singh was asked to touch the same and he had touched the same. Thereafter, he was directed to put his hands in the water. On doing so, the colour of the water turned into pink. After demonstration, the said water was thrown out. The number of said GC notes were noted down in a document. The said GC notes were put in the pants pocket of complainant Amit Kumar by independent witness Sh. Dharambir Singh. Thereafter, all the team members were directed to wash their hands and they washed their hands. Thereafter, they started the proceedings.

67. It is further deposed by PW5 that he has been shown the Handing Over Memo in case RC DAI2014A0018, dated 12.06.2014, which bears his signatures at point 'B', on each page, the same is Ex.PW1/C. After seeing the same, he CC No. 01/15 Page No. 39 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 has stated that this is the same document in which the number of said GC notes were recorded and the pretrap proceedings were recorded by the IO.

68. Before proceeding to the spot, a DVR and a new memory card was arranged, which was inserted in the DVR. After ensuring that it did not contain any prerecorded conversation, his introductory voices as well as that of other independent witness Dharmabir Singh were recorded.

69. It is further deposed by PW5 that thereafter, all trap team proceeded from CBI office to the spot in two vehicles, one was of the complainant and another one was of the CBI. He alongwith one Inspector of CBI was with complainant Amit Kumar in his vehicle and remaining trap team members including the independent witness Sh. Dharambir Singh were in the another Government vehicle.

70. It is further deposed by PW5 that as it was already 10:30 a.m., the complainant Amit Kumar received a call from Principal, Fakir Chand Sharma. Then immediately the vehicle was stopped and DVR was put in recording mode. The complainant Amit Kumar talked with Principal Fakir Chand Sharma putting his mobile on speaker mode. From the other side it was asked, "in how much time you are CC No. 01/15 Page No. 40 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 reaching in the school." The complainant replied him that he is coming within half an hour. Thereafter, the DVR was switched off and they proceeded towards school.

71. It is further deposed by PW5 that on reaching near the Government school at village Kanganheri, New Delhi, the vehicles were stopped and complainant was directed to enter into the school and he was asked to act as shadow witness with the complainant. The other trap team members remained outside the said school and it was directed to the complainant to make a call after completion of the transaction of the illegal gratification to Principal Fakir Chand Sharma.

72. It is further deposed by PW5 that the complainant went inside the school first and then he followed him as shadow witness. In the school, he made enquiry regarding the Principal on the pretext that he wanted to get admitted his nephew in the school. PW5 was asked to wait as the Principal was in the meeting. When the Principal became free, he came out and sat on a cot as there was no electricity. Principal Fakir Chand Sharma enquired from him regarding the admission of his nephew. The Principal asked him to bring some documents regarding the education of his nephew. Thereafter, the Principal asked him to go outside from the CC No. 01/15 Page No. 41 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 school. As such, he reached outside and stood alongwith the other trap team members.

73. It is further deposed by PW5 that after some time, the IO, CBI received a call from complainant Amit Kumar, informing that Principal Fakir Chand Sharma had accepted the illegal gratification. The CBI team rushed inside the school. Two Inspectors caught hold the Principal Fakir Chand Sharma from his both wrists. The DVR was taken back from the complainant by one of the Inspectors and switched it off.

74. It is further deposed by PW5 that thereafter, a solution was prepared by the CBI officials and the fingers of right hand of Principal Fakir Chand Sharma were dipped in the said solution. On doing so, the said solution turned pink. The said solution was transferred in a clean bottle and was sealed with the seal of CBI.

75. It is further deposed by PW5 that thereafter, again a fresh solution was prepared by the CBI officials and the fingers of left hand of Principal Fakir Chand Sharma were dipped in the said solution. On doing so, the said solution turned pink. The said solution was also transferred in a clean bottle and was sealed with the seal of CBI.

CC No. 01/15 Page No. 42 of 212

CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017

76. It is further deposed by PW5 that thereafter, the tainted bribe amount was recovered by other independent witness Dharambir Singh from the left side shirt pocket of Principal Fakir Chand Sharma. Same were counted and were found Rs.9,000/ in denomination of 9 GC notes of Rs.1000/ each. It had been informed by the complainant that Principal Fakir Chand Sharma demanded Rs.10,000/ but after negotiation he agreed to accept Rs.9,000/ from him as such he had only handed over Rs.9,000/ and kept one GC note of Rs.1000/ with him. Thereafter the said GC notes were sealed in two bundles keeping Rs.9000/ in one bundle and Rs.1000/ in another bundle.

77. It is further deposed by PW5 that thereafter, pocket wash of wearing shirt of Principal Fakir Chand Sharma was taken in a freshly prepared solution. On doing so the said solution also turned pink. The said solution was then transferred in clean glass bottle and was sealed with the seal of CBI. Thereafter, some documents were prepared by the CBI, which were signed by all trap team members including the witness and the complainant.

78. It is further deposed by PW5 that he has been shown the recovery memo dated 12.06.2014, Ex.PW1/D (D 5 pages 1937), which bears his signatures at points "B" on CC No. 01/15 Page No. 43 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 each pages.

79. PW5 has identified a sealed envelope with Court seal. On opening the same, it was found containing two envelope, one is of yellow cover Ex.PW1/A and another is of brown colour which is Ex.PW1/M. On opening the yellow colour envelope, it was found containing 9 GC notes of Rs. 1,000/ denomination each Ex.PW1/L. After seeing the same and telling with the numbers mentioned in recovery memo already Ex.PW1/B, he has stated that these are the same notes which were recovered from the left side shirt pocket of Principal Fakir Chand Sharma and numbers were mentioned in the recovery memo. The yellow colour envelope Ex.PW1/K bears his signatures at pointB.

80. It is further deposed by PW5 that on opening the brown colour envelope, it was found containing 1 GC notes of Rs. 1,000/ denomination already Ex.PW1/N. After seeing the same and tallying with the numbers mentioned in handing over Ex.PW1/C, he has stated that this is the same note which was given by complainant Amit Kumar. The brown colour envelope is Ex.PW1/M bearing his signatures at pointB.

81. It is further deposed by PW5 that he has been CC No. 01/15 Page No. 44 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 shown the rough site plan Ex.PW1/E bearing his signatures at pointB (D6 page 38).

82. It is further deposed by PW5 that he has been shown the arrest cum personal search memo of Fakir Chand Sharma Principal, Govt. Co. Ed. Sr. Secondary School, Kangan Heri, Najafgarh, New Delhi vide which Fakir Chand Sharma Principal was arrested and personal belonging of the accused were seized, the same is Ex.PW5/A bearing his signatures at pointA (D7 pages 3940).

83. PW5 has identified a yellow colour envelope sealed with the seal CBI ACB ND 65/2013. On opening the same, it was found containing a mobile phone make Samsung, battery of which is tagged with a green tag. After seeing the same, he has stated that this is the phone which was used by Fakir Chand Sharma Principal and seized vide recovery memo Ex.PW1/D, the phone & battery are now Ex.PW5/B (colly.). The yellow colour envelope is also bearing his signatures at pointA & same is Ex.PW5/C.

84. PW5 has identifieda sealed pullanda sealed with the seal of Court already Ex.PW1/S bearing his signatures at pointB. On opening the same, it was found containing a shirt Ex.PW1/P. After seeing the same, he has stated that the CC No. 01/15 Page No. 45 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 pocket of the shirt bears his signatures at pointB. This is the same shirt which had worn by Fakir Chand Sharma Principal on 12.06.2014 at the time of trap.

85. PW5 has identified that three glass bottles, sealed with the seal of VBR Mark Ex.RHW, Ex.LHW & Ex.Left Side Shirt Pocket wash. The said bottles are already Ex.PW1/P, Ex.PW/1/Q & Ex.PW1/R, these bottles are bearing his signatures at pointC. After seeing the same, he has stated that these are the same bottles in which the right hand wash, left hand wash and left side shirt pocket wash of the accused Fakir Chand Sharma Principal were transferred.

86. PW5 has identified a yellow colour envelope sealed with the seal of Court. On opening the same, it was found containing brown colour envelope Ex.PW1/U. On opening the same, it was found containing a memory card Ex.PW1/U1. After seeing the same, he has stated that this is the same memory card in which the recordings during the verification proceeding on 10.06.2014 was done by the CBI. The brown colour envelope Ex.PW1/U bears his signatures at pointB.

87. PW5 has identifed a yellow colour envelope sealed with the seal of Court. On opening the same, it was CC No. 01/15 Page No. 46 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 found containing brown colour envelope Ex.PW1/U3. On opening the same, it was found containing a memory card Ex.PW1/U2. After seeing the same, he has stated that this is the same memory card in which the recordings during the trap proceeding on 12.06.2014 was done by the CBI. The brown colour envelope Ex.PW1/U3 bears his signatures at pointB and the plastic cover of the memory card also bears his signatures at pointB.

88. It is further deposed by PW5 that he had brought with him the seal which was handed over to him by the CBI after sealing the documents. PW5 produced the same before the Court, same is Ex.PW5/D.

89. It is further deposed by PW5 that after one or quarter past one month, he again attended the office of CBI. The investigation copy of recorded conversation which took place between the accused namely Fakir Chand Sharma and the complainant Amit Kumar during the verification proceedings and trap proceeding was played through the official laptop of CBI. The complainant Amit Kumar identified his own voice as well as the voice of Principal Fakir Chand Sharma in the said conversation. They had prepared the said transcript Ex.PW1/G & Ex.PW1/H each page of which bears PW5's signatures at pointB. IO has also prepared voice CC No. 01/15 Page No. 47 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 identification memo dated 17.07.2014, Ex.PW1/F which bears his signatures at pointB.

90. PW6 Sh. Dharamvir Singh has deposed that he visited the office of CBI on 12.06.2014 on the direction of his higher officers. He reached in the CBI office at about 06:30 a.m. or 06:45 a.m. and met CBI Inspector Sh. Ramesh Kumar, who informed him that the Principal of Kanganheri School is demanding bribe from complainant Amit Kumar. Thereafter, he recorded his (PW5's) voice like "main Dharamvir Singh, Public Relation Inspector, Department of Post, CBI office se bol raha hun".

91. It is further deposed by PW6 that thereafter, Sh. Amit Kumar produced a sum of Rs.10,000/ in the denomination of Rs.1000/ each. The details of those GC notes were noted down. Thereafter, some powder was sprinkled on those GC notes. Thereafter, a demonstration was given to explain the chemical reaction of that powder. On doing so, the colour of the water changed into pink. The said water was thrown away. Thereafter, he was asked by the CBI officer to put the said GC notes of Rs.10,000/ in the pocket of Amit. Accordingly, he put those GC notes in the pocket of complainant Amit Kumar.

CC No. 01/15 Page No. 48 of 212

CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017

92. It is further deposed by PW6 that thereafter, they left the CBI office for going to Kanganheri School in two vehicles. He was in the vehicle alongwith CBI staff and complainant Amit Kumar was in the separate vehicle alongwith another independent witness Sh. Sunil Thapliyal and some CBI staff.

93. It is further deposed by PW6 that they reached near the Kanganheri School at about 09:30 a.m. On reaching there, he alongwith some CBI officials remained outside the school and complainant Amit Kumar and independent witness Sunil Thapliyal went inside the school. After 15 to 20 minutes, the CBI staff received a call. Thereafter, he alongwith the other CBI officials went inside the school. The Principal was caught hold by the CBI officials from his both wrists, after entering in the school. It was informed that Principal, Fakir Chand Sharma accepted the bribe amount from the complainant Amit Kumar. He was asked by the CBI officials to took out the bribe amount from the wearing shirt pocket of Principal Fakir Chand Sharma. He took out the said amount from the left side shirt pocket of the accused Fakir Chand Sharma. On counting the same, it was found Rs.9,000/. The remaining Rs.1,000/ note was taken from the complainant Amit Kumar. The said notes recovered from CC No. 01/15 Page No. 49 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 the accused Fakir Chand Sharma were tallied with the numbers noted down earlier. These GC notes were tallied and found correct with the list in which the serial numbers were already recorded.

94. It is further deposed by PW6 that thereafter, the hand washes of both hands of the accused Fakir Chand Sharma were taken separately. On doing so, the colour of the said water changed into pink. The said water was transferred in the separate bottles and then the bottles were sealed with the seal of CBI.

95. It is further deposed by PW6 that thereafter, the wash of the wearing shirt pocket of accused Fakir Chand Sharma was taken. On doing so, the colour of the shirt water changed into pink. The said water was transferred into a glass bottle and the said bottle was sealed with the seal of CBI. Thereafter, some writing work was done by CBI officers and they signed the said papers. Thereafter some more items were also seized and after sealing the documents, the seal used for sealing was handed over to him for safe custody and since then the seal was in his possession. He had brought the same in the court. The said seal is Ex.PW6/A.

96. PW6 has identified the handing over memo in CC No. 01/15 Page No. 50 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 case RC DAI2014A0018 dated 12.06.2014, Ex.PW1/C. This handing over memo bears his signatures at point 'C' on each page and it is the same handing over memo in which the number of GC notes produced by Complainant Amit Kumar were noted down.

97. PW6 has identified the recovery memo dated 12.06.2014, Ex.PW1/D. This bears his signatures at point 'C' on each page. After seeing the same, witness has stated that it is the same seizure memo which was prepared by the CBI officer and the number of GC notes recovered from the left side front pocket of wearing shirt of accused Fakir Chand Sharma were noted down.

98. PW6 has identified the rough site plan Ex.PW1/E which bears his signatures at point 'C'.

99. PW6 has identified the arrest cum personal search memo of accused Fakir Chand Sharma, Principal, government CoEdu. Sr. Secondary School, Kananheri, Najafgarh, New Delhi. The said arrest cum personal search memo is already Ex.PW5/A and same bears his signatures at point 'C' on each page.

100. PW6 has identified a khakhi colour envelope sealed with the seal of court (SCR). On opening the same, it CC No. 01/15 Page No. 51 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 is found containing two envelopes, one of yellow colour Ex.PW1/K and another of Khakhi colour Ex.PW1/M. The yellow colour envelope Ex.PW1/K bears his signatures at point 'C'. On opening the envelope of yellow colour Ex.PW1/K it is found containing 9 (nine) GC notes of Rs.1000/ each in denomination, total Rs.9000/ and after seeing the same and tallying with the numbers mentioned in the recovery memo Ex.PW1/D, witness has stated that these are the same notes, which were recovered by him from left side pocket of wearing shirt of accused Fakir Chand Sharma. The said GC notes are Ex.PW1/L (colly.).

101. PW6 has identified the khakhi colour envelope Ex.PW1/M opened and it is found containing one GC note of Rs.1000/ in denomination and after seeing the same and after tallying with the handing over memo Ex.PW1/C, he has stated that this is the same note which was produced by complainant Amit Kumar. The said GC note is already Ex.PW1/N. The khakhi colour envelope Ex.PW1/M bears his signatures at point C.

102. PW6 has identified three glass bottles sealed with the seal of VBR CHEM DIV CFSL CBI New Delhi bearing mark EXRHW, EXLHW and Left side shift pocket wash. After seeing the same, he has stated that these are the same bottles CC No. 01/15 Page No. 52 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 in which the right hand wash, left hand wash and left side shirt pocket wash of the accused Fakir Chand Sharma were transferred. These bottles are already Ex.PW1/P, Ex.PW1/Q and Ex.PW1/R respectively. The said bottles bears his signatures at points 'B'. These bottles contained pink colour water.

103. PW6 has identified one cloth pullanda bearing RC DAI2014A0018 sealed with the seal of court (SCR). The cloth pullanda is Ex.PW1/S, which bears his signatures at point 'C'. On opening the cloth pullanda, it is found containing one half sleeve checkdar shirt with blue green creamish colour. The said shirt is Ex.PW1/T. The left side pocket of the shirt bears his signatures at point 'C'. After seeing the same, he has stated that it is the same shirt from the pocket of which the GC notes were recovered.

104. PW6 has identified a yellow colour envelope Ex.Q2 sealed with the seal of Court (SCR). On opening the same, it is found containing a khakhi colour envelope Ex.PW1/U3. This envelope bears his signatures at point 'C'. On opening the envelope Ex.PW1/U3, it is found containing a micro SD Card 4 GB with a transparent plastic cover. The plastic cover bears his signature at point 'C' After seeing the same, he has stated that this is the same memory card which CC No. 01/15 Page No. 53 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 was used for recording the conversation on 12.06.2014.

105. It is further deposed by PW6 that the voice identification memo in case RC DAI2014A0018 dated 17.07.2014, Ex.PW1/F, bears his signatures at point 'C'. The rough transcript of the recorded conversation Ex.PW1/G bears his signatures at point 'C' on each page.

106. It is further deposed by PW6 that the rough transcript of the recorded conversation Ex.PW1/H bears his signatures at point 'C' on each page.

107. PW8 Sh. Arjun Kumar Maurya, Inspector, CBI has deposed that During the year 2014, he was working as S.I. in CBI, ACB, New Delhi.

108. It is further deposed by PW8 that On 10.06.2014, he was called by his S.P, Sh. D.K.Barik and he introduced him to one person namely Sh. Amit Kumar and also informed him that he has some complaint against a Government official and he directed the complainant to go with him for the purpose of verification of the complaint. Accordingly, the complainant accompanied PW8 to his cabin. PW8 enquired from the complainant and he informed that he was working as a IT Assistant on contract basis in Govt. CoEducational Sr. Secondary School, Kanganheri, New Delhi. He also informed CC No. 01/15 Page No. 54 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 that he has been employed there through a company situated at Metro Station, Preet Vihar. He further informed that the company released his payment on receipt of attendance sheet duly signed by the Principal of the school. Sh. Fakir Chand Sharma, Principal of that school, who was demanding illegal gratification, other than legal remuneration for signing the attendance sheet and demanding the illegal gratification to the tune of Rs.10,000/ from the complainant. PW8 directed the complainant to give the complaint in writing. Accordingly, he wrote a complaint in English and handed over to PW8. He took this complaint to his S.P. Sh. D.K. Barik and in turn S.P. Marked the same to him for verification.

109. PW6 has identified the complaint Ex.PW1/A, it is the same complaint, which marked to him by S.P. D.K. Barik. The remarks of Sh. D.K.Barik are at encircled portion mark 'B'. PW8 identify the signatures of the then S.P. Sh. DK Barik at point 'C'.

110. It is further deposed by PW8 that in order to verify the complaint, he arranged an independent witness Sh. Sunil Thapliyal. PW8 also arranged a Sony make digital voice recorder and a company sealed 4 GB micro SD memory card. Thereafter, PW8 introduced the complainant Amit Kumar with Sh. Sunil Thapliyal, independent witness and PW8 also CC No. 01/15 Page No. 55 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 showed the written complaint to Sh. Sunil Thapliyal. After going through the written complaint Sh Sunil Thapliyal made some enquiries from the complainant to satisfy himself. Thereafter, the introductory voice of witness Sh Sunil Thapliyal was recorded in the said micro SD Card through DVR. It was decided to make a call from the mobile of the complainant to the mobile of accused Fakir Chand Sharma. Accordingly, a call was made and the conversation was recorded in the said micro SD card by keeping the mobile phone of the complainant on speaker mode.

111. It is further deposed by PW8 that in this conversation, the suspect Fakir Chand Sharma directed the complainant to come at his residence. He further informed that at that point of time, he was not at his residence and he would reach at home within one and half hour. Since the residence of Fakir Chand Sharma was about one and half hour traveling distance from the CBI office, accordingly, the verification team consisting of PW8, complainant, independent witness Sunil Thapliyal left for the spot i.e. residence of Fakir Chand Sharma in a Government vehicle at about 12.15 hours.

112. It is further deposed by PW8 that they reached near the residence of Fakir Chand Sharma at about 1.30 p.m. CC No. 01/15 Page No. 56 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 On reaching there, PW8 decided to confirm whether Fakir Chand Sharma reached at his residence or not. Again, a called was made from the mobile of the complainant to the mobile of Fakir Chand Sharma. This conversation was also recorded in the said micro SD card through DVR by keeping the mobile phone on speaker mode. In this conversation, Fakir Chand Sharma informed that he was reaching at his home within 5 minutes. Thereafter, PW8 briefed the independent witness to go along with the complainant. At this point, the complainant informed that Fakir Chand Sharma will not make any demand in the presence of any third person. Then, PW8 directed the independent witness to accompany the complainant upto the gate of the house of Fakir Chand Sharma so, that he could identify the accused Fakir Chand Sharma while opening the gate of the house and also to read the name plate, if any affixed on the gate of the house. Thereafter, PW8 switched on the DVR and put the same in the recording mode and switch on the key hold key so that any other key will not function. Then PW8 handed over the said DVR to the complainant and both of them to go to the residence of Fakir Chand Sharma. Accordingly, they went and PW8 remained in the vehicle.

113. It is further deposed by PW8 that after half an CC No. 01/15 Page No. 57 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 hour the complainant and the independent witness came back to the vehicle. The DVR was taken back by PW8 and was switch off. Thereafter, PW8 asked the independent witness Sunil Thapliyal about his position to which he answered that he was standing at the gate of the house of accused Fakir Chand Sharma and when the door was opened, he saw a person aged about 50 years who opened the door. Thereafter, they returned back to the CBI office and reached in CBI office at about 04.00 p.m. On reaching in CBI office, the verification team heard the recorded conversation which actually established the demand of bribe of Rs.10,000/ from the complainant by Fakir Chand Sharma for signing the attendance sheet of the complainant.

114. It is further deposed by PW8 that thereafter, he prepared a copy of the recorded conversation by using his official laptop for the purpose of investigation and the micro SD card was taken out of the DVR and after putting the same in its plastic case, PW8 got signed the same himself and from the independent witness, complainant and the said micro SD card was then put in an envelope and the envelope was sealed by using CBI seal and the envelope was also signed by PW8, complainant and independent witness, thereafter, he prepared a verification memo.

CC No. 01/15 Page No. 58 of 212

CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017

115. It is further deposed by PW8 that the verification report in CO 53/14/CBI/ACB/New Delhi, Ex.PW1/B (D3, page 11 to 14), which was prepared by him bears signatures at point 'C' on each page.

116. PW8 has identified a yellow colour envelope sealed with the seal of court (SCR). The same is opened and found containing another envelope of khaki colour already Ex.PW1/U. After seeing the same, he has stated that the khaki colour envelope Ex.PW1/U bears his signatures at point 'C' and his handwriting at point 'D'.

117. It is further deposed by PW8 that on opening the khakhi colour envelope, it is found containing a micro SD memory card, 4 GB make Kingston kept in a plastic cover. After seeing the same, he has stated that this is same memory card which was used by him during the course of verification. The memory card is Ex.PW1/U1.

118. It is further deposed by PW8 that all the proceedings were completed by him for about 6.30 p.m. So, PW8 gave the report to his Superintendent of Police Sh. DK Barik on the next day i.e. on 11.06.2014.

119. It is further deposed by PW8 that thereafter, on 12.06.2014, PW8 came to know that a RC was registered in CC No. 01/15 Page No. 59 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 the case which was verified by him. PW8 was called in the office early in the morning. Accordingly, PW8 reached in the office at about 07.00 a.m. It came to his knowledge that Inspector Ramesh Kumar is the Trap Laying Officer, in the case. When PW8 reached in CBI office, the other officers of CBI, Insp. Deepak Gaur, Insp. Sanjay Upadhyay, SI Ajeet Singh etc. were there. Two independent witnesses namely Sunil Thapliyal and one other, were present in the office. Insp. Ramesh Kumar briefed all the trap team members. The complainant Kumar was present in the office and having a sum of Rs.10,000/ in the form of 10 GC notes of Rs.1000/ each. The distinct numbers of said GC notes, so produced by the complainant were noted down in the handing over memo. Sh. Sanjay Upadhyay, Inspector, sprinkled the phenolphthalein powder on the said GC notes and one witness was asked to touch the said GC notes. Thereafter his hands were got washed in the solution of water and sodium carbonate. On doing so, the said solution turned pink. After giving the demonstration, the said solution was thrown away.

120. It is further deposed by PW8 that thereafter, remaining phenolphthalein powder was returned back to the malkhana. TLO Insp. Ramesh Kumar instructed to wash the hands of all the trap team members with soap and water.

CC No. 01/15 Page No. 60 of 212

CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 Thereafter, a file was made containing FIR, verification memo, A4 size blank papers, carbon papers and some stationery material etc. The trap kit was arranged from the malkhana which contained clean glass bottles, spoon candles, sealing material, sodium carbonate and some money about Rs.400 to 500 to meet the expenses. All the proceedings were recorded in a handing over memorandum. All the trap team members signed the said handing over memo. The handing over memo Ex.PW1/C, bears his signatures at point D, on each page.

121. It is further deposed by PW8 that before leaving the office, the introductory voice of both the independent witnesses were recorded in the 4GB micro SD card through DVR.

122. It is further deposed by PW8 that all the trap team members left the CBI office at about 08.00 a.m in one or two government vehicles. The complainant was also having his own car. They reached near the Govt. Co Educational Sr. Secondary School, Kanganheri at about 9.30 a.m. On reaching there, the Government vehicle was parked at some distance from the school. The independent witness Sunil Thapliyal, who was sitting in the car of the complainant, went inside the school. At that time, the DVR CC No. 01/15 Page No. 61 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 was given to him by putting it in recording mode. The remaining trap team members took their positions near the school. From the place, where PW8 was standing, the complainant was visible to PW8 and PW8 saw that he was talking with some person, who was sitting on the cot under a tree. Sunil Thapliyal, independent witness was directed to talk with the accused Fakir Chand Sharma on the pretext of admission of his son in the school. After sometime, TLO Insp. Ramesh Kumar informed all the trap team members to go inside the school. Accordingly, all the remaining trap members went inside the school. The complainant introduced them with accused Fakir Chand Sharma and stated that the accused had received the bribe amount. Insp. Ramesh Kumar challenged the accused Fakir Chand Sharma for taking illegal gratification from the complainant to which accused became perplexed. Before challenging the accused, the DVR was taken back from the complainant and switched off.

123. It is further deposed by PW8 that thereafter, the hand wash of both the hands of the accused Fakir Chand Sharma was taken in a solution of sodium carbonate separately and on doing so, it turned pink. The said washes were transferred in clean glass bottles and were sealed with the seal of CBI.

CC No. 01/15 Page No. 62 of 212

CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017

124. It is further deposed by PW8 that it was informed by the complainant that during the conversation, complainant requested to the accused to reduce the demand amount of bribe from Rs.10,000/ to which the amount was reduced to Rs.9000/ from Rs.10,000/ by the accused. As such, complainant has only handed over Rs.9000/ to accused Fakir Chand Sharma and kept the remaining Rs.1000/ GC note with him.

125. It is further deposed by PW8 that Rs.9000/, which were recovered from the accused Fakir Chand Sharma, the distinct number of said GC notes were noted down in the recovery memo. The hand written recovery memo was prepared at the spot.

126. PW8 has identified the recovery memo Ex.PW1/D, which bears his signatures at point 'D' on each page.

127. It is further deposed by PW8 that the money was recovered from the left side shirt pocket of accused Fakir Chand Sharma. Accordingly, the wash of left side pocket of shirt was also taken. On doing so, the said solution turned pink. After taking the pocket wash, the same was transferred in a clean glass bottle.

CC No. 01/15 Page No. 63 of 212

CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017

128. PW8 has identified a sealed pullanda sealed with the seal of court (SCR) Ex.PW1/S. On opening the same, it is found containing a half sleeve checkdar shirt with blue green creamish colour already Ex.PW1/T. After seeing the same, he has stated that this is the same shirt, which was worn by accused Fakir Chand Sharma on 12.06.2014 at the time of trap.

129. PW8 has identified three glass bottles sealed with the seal of VBR CHEM DIV CFSL CBI New Delhi bearing mark Ex.RHW, LHW and Ex.Left Side Shirt Pocket Wash. After seeing the same, he has stated that these are the same bottles in which the right hand wash, left hand wash and left side shirt pocket wash of accused were transferred. The said three bottles are Ex.PW1/P, Ex.PW1/Q and Ex.PW1/R.

130. PW8 has identified a rough site plan of the place of occurrence, which was also prepared by him. The same is Ex.PW1/E which bears his signatures at point C.

131. PW9 Inspector Ramesh Kumar has deposed that he was working as Inspector in CBI, ACB, New Delhi since 2012. The case RC No. DAI2014A0018 was registered on 12.06.2014 in CBI, ACB, New Delhi against Fakir Chand Sharma, Principal, Govt. CoEd. Sr. Sec. School, Kanganheri, CC No. 01/15 Page No. 64 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 New Delhi, on the basis of complaint lodged by Sh. Amit Kumar dated 10.06.2014. The said complaint is Ex.PW1/A. The said complaint was marked to Sh. A. K. Maurya, Sub Inspector by Sh. D. K. Barik, the then Superintendent of Police, ACB, New Delhi for verification. He has conducted the verification of the said case and submitted his verification report dated 10.06.2014 to SP, CBI, ACB, New Delhi. The same is already Ex.PW1/B. The FIR of the case was marked to PW9 for investigation. The FIR of the case bears the signatures of Sh. D. K. Barik at point A and that of the complainant Sh. Amit Kumar at point B. The FIR is Ex.PW9/A.

132. It is further deposed by PW9 that when the case was entrusted to him for investigation, a team consisting of PW8, Insp. Sanjay Upadhyay, Insp. Deepak Gaur, Insp. B. S. Meena, SI A. K.Maurya and SI Ajeet was constituted. Thereafter, the presence of two independent witnesses namely Sh. Sunil Thapliyal and Dharamvir Singh was secured through Duty Officer, CBI, ACB, New Delhi. The complainant Sh. Amit Kumar was introduced with the trap team members and both the independent witnesses. After interaction with Sh. Amit Kumar by the team members and independent witnesses, it was decided to lay down the trap against CC No. 01/15 Page No. 65 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 accused Fakir Chand Sharma, as he was demanding a bribe of Rs.10,000/ from the complainant Sh. Amit Kumar, for completing the attendance of Sh. Amit Kumar (complainant), who was working as IT Assistant in the Govt. Coed. Sr. Sec. School, Kanganheri, New Delhi. The attendance was required by the complainant Amit Kumar for taking his salary from his firm i.e. Computer Clinic India Pvt. Ltd. through which he was posted in the school. The attendance was required duly attested by the Principal of the aforesaid school.

133. It is further deposed by PW9 that after that, a DVR was arranged by Sh. A. K. Maurya, Sub Inspector alongwith a sealed 4 GB memory card. The sealed memory card was shown to both the independent witnesses and it was desealed and after checking the emptiness of the memory card, it was inserted in the DVR. Thereafter, memory in the said memory card was selected through DVR and the formal introductory voices of both the independent witnesses were recorded.

134. It is further deposed by PW9 that thereafter, complainant Sh. Amit Kumar produced a sum of Rs.10,000/, in the denomination of GC notes of Rs.1,000/ each. The notes were smeared with phenolphthalein powder by Insp. Sanjay Upadhyay. Thereafter, a solution of sodium carbonate CC No. 01/15 Page No. 66 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 was prepared in a glass tumbler to demonstrate the reaction of phenolphthalein powder with the solution of Sodium Carbonate. The independent witness Sh. Dharamvir Singh was asked to touch the said smeared GC notes and thereafter he was requested to dip his fingers in the solution of Sodium Carbonate. On doing so, the colour of the said solution turned pink. After demonstration, the solution was thrown away and the glass tumbler was washed.

135. It is further deposed by PW9 that thereafter, the distinct numbers of GC notes produced by Sh. Amit Kumar were mentioned in the Handing Over Memo, which is Ex.PW1/C and bears his signatures at point 'E', on each page. The smeared GC notes were put in the left pocket of jeans worn by Sh. Amit Kumar, complainant, by Sh. Dharamvir Singh, independent witness. Before keeping the GC notes in the pocket of the complainant Sh. Amit Kumar, the search was carried out by Sh. Deepak Gaur, Inspector. Nothing incriminating was found from the possession of the complainant Sh. Amit Kumar. The complainant was only allowed to carry his mobile phone and the treated GC notes to the tune of Rs.10,000/. Sh. Sunil Thapliyal was directed to act as a shadow witness and accompany the complainant in order to see the transaction of bribe amount and to CC No. 01/15 Page No. 67 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 overhear the conversation which was likely to be taken place between the complainant Sh. Amit Kumar and the accused Fakir Chand Sharma. The complainant was directed to give a missed call from his mobile to PW9's official mobile no. 9650094287. Complainant Amit Kumar was also directed to hand over the bribe amount to the accused on his specific demand.

136. It is further deposed by PW9 that thereafter, a trap kit was arranged, which was consisting of a leather bag, sealing material, white papers, complaint of Sh. Amit Kumar and verification report alongwith FIR, sodium carbonate powder, neat and clean glass bottles. The pretrap proceedings were recorded in the Handing Over Memo and all the trap team members including independent witnesses and the complainant signed the same. The complainant Sh. Amit Kumar requested to take his personal car, because he always used this car to go to school for duty. Thereafter, it was decided that complainant Sh. Amit Kumar and independent witness Sh. Sunil Thapliyal would use the same car and CBI team and the another independent witness Sh. Dharamvir Singh would use two official vehicles. Accordingly, the CBI team alongwith Sh. Dharamvir Singh left CBI office at about 08:00 hours and complainant Sh. Amit Kumar and CC No. 01/15 Page No. 68 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 Sunil Thapliyal used the personal car of the complainant. CBI team followed the car drove by the complainant.

137. It is further deposed by PW9 that while the trap team was on the way, complainant Sh. Amit Kumar stopped his car and informed that he had received a missed call from the mobile phone of accused Fakir Chand Sharma. After that, complainant was allowed to make a call on the mobile phone of the accused Fakir Chand Sharma. The same was simultaneously recorded in the DVR in the presence of Sh. Sunil Thapliyal by switching on the DVR in recorded mode and the complainant was directed to keep his mobile on speaker mode. In this call accused Fakir Chand Sharma was asking the complainant about his location and how much time he would take to reach at the school. Thereafter, the DVR was switched off and again kept in the pocket of Sh. Amit Kumar. The CBI team and the complainant Sh. Amit Kumar reached near the school at about 09:30 hrs. The CBI vehicles were parked in disguise manner near the school. The complainant Sh. Amit Kumar and independent witness Sh. Sunil Thapliyal were directed to go inside the school. Independent witness Sh. Sunil Thapliyal was directed to meet with the Principal and to take a plea of admission of his child in the school. Accordingly, Sh. Amit Kumar and independent CC No. 01/15 Page No. 69 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 witness Sh. Sunil Thapliyal entered in the school. After some time Sh. Sunil Thapliyal came out from the school and on query he disclosed that he met with accused Fakir Chand Sharma and the accused directed him to come to the school after summer vacations alongwith his child and documents for his admission. He also disclosed that Sh. Amit Kumar started talking with accused Fakir Chand Sharma. Thereafter, a call was received by PW8 from the mobile of the complainant and the complainant told that accused Fakir Chand Sharma had accepted the bribe amount from him. Thereafter, all the team members and another independent witness Sh. Dharamvir Singh were alerted and entered in the school. After entering in the school, it was seen that the complainant was talking with a person, who was sitting on a Charpai. Later on, the person who was sitting on the Charpai, aged about 5657 years, was identified by the complainant as accused Fakir Chand Sharma. After identification, both the hands of accused Fakir Chand Sharma were caught by PW8 and Insp. Sanjay Upadhyay from his wrists. Sub Inspector A. K. Maurya was directed to take back the DVR from the complainant. Accordingly, the DVR was taken back from the complainant and was switched off.

138. It is further deposed by PW9 that the CC No. 01/15 Page No. 70 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 complainant Sh. Amit Kumar disclosed that accused Fakir Chand Sharma had taken the bribe amount of Rs.9,000/ from him and the said amount was kept by the accused in his left side shirt pocket. Thereafter, fresh water was arranged from the school and a solution of sodium carbonate was prepared in a neat and clean glass tumbler. Accused Fakir Chand Sharma was asked to dip his right hand fingers in the said solution. On doing so, the said solution turned pink. The same was transferred in a neat and clean glass bottle, which was sealed with the seal of CBI. After that, another fresh solution of sodium carbonate was prepared in a neat and clean glass tumbler. Accused Fakir Chand Sharma was asked to dip his left hand fingers in the said solution. On doing so, the said solution turned pink. The same was transferred in a neat and clean glass bottle, which was sealed with the seal of CBI. The white paper labels were pasted on the said bottles and the said bottles were marked as RHW and LHW, respectively.

139. It is further deposed by PW9 that while the trap proceedings were going on, accused Fakir Chand Sharma was asked about the bribe taken by him from the complainant. On being asked, accused Fakir Chand Sharma kept mum. Some employees/ staff were gathered near the spot. One staff CC No. 01/15 Page No. 71 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 member Sh. Om Prakash, who further disclosed that he was the Vice Principal of the school, was requested to accompany the CBI team for further trap proceedings.

140. It is further deposed by PW9 that thereafter, Sh. Dharamveer Singh, Independent witness was asked to recover the bribe amount from the left side pocket of accused Fakir Chand Sharma. Sh. Dharamveer Singh took out the bribe amount from the aforesaid pocket of accused Fakir Chand Sharma. Both the independent witnesses were directed to tally the said amount from the number mentioned in the Handing Over Memo. Both the witnesses counted the bribe money and found that the same were Rs. 9,000/ and after tallying with the number mentioned in the Handing Over Memo they confirmed that these were the same GC notes which were produced by the Complainant Amit Kumar in the CBI Office. Both the independent witnesses signed on the Handing Over Memo after tallying the bribe amount recovered from accused Fakir Chand Sharma.

141. It is further deposed by PW9 that thereafter, the complainant Sh. Amit Kumar was asked about another one note of Rs.1,000/. On being asked, he produced one GC note of Rs.1,000/ denomination and stated that the accused Fakir Chand Sharma was agreed to accept Rs.9,000/ for CC No. 01/15 Page No. 72 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 completing his attendance after a negotiation between them. The said GC note was taken back from the complainant and handed over to Sh. Dharamvir Singh to keep that separate from the recovered bribe amount.

142. It is further deposed by PW9 that thereafter, a T shirt was arranged from the market and the wearing shirt of accused Fakir Chand Sharma was got changed. Thereafter, a fresh solution of sodium carbonate was prepared in a neat and clean glass tumbler. The left side shirt pocket of the shirt of the accused Fakir Chand Sharma was dipped in the said solution. On doing so, the said solution turned pink. Then the said solution was transferred in a neat and clean glass bottle, which was further sealed with the seal of CBI. A white paper label was pasted on the said bottle and the same was marked as Left Side Shirt Pocket Wash.

143. It is further deposed by PW9 that the labels pasted on the three bottles were got signed by both the independent witnesses, PW9, Sh. Om Prakash, VicePrincipal of the school and accused Fakir Chand Sharma. The pocket of the shirt was also signed by both the independent witnesses, PW9, Sh. Om Prakash, VicePrincipal of the school and accused Fakir Chand Sharma. The said shirt was put in a white markin cloth and the same was sealed with the seal of CC No. 01/15 Page No. 73 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 CBI. The markin cloth was also got signed by above mentioned independent witnesses, accused Fakir Chand Sharma and PW9.

144. It is further deposed by PW9 that thereafter, accused Fakir Chand Sharma was asked some questions but he gave evasive replies. Thereafter, the conversation recorded in the memory card through DVR was heard in the presence of above mentioned independent witnesses, Sh. Om Prakash, Vice Principal, accused Fakir Chand Sharma and other trap team members. The said conversation established that accused Fakir Chand Sharma demanded and accepted negotiated amount to the tune of Rs.9,000/ from the complainant Sh. Amit Kumar. Sh. Om Prakash, Vice Principal was asked to produce attendance register pertaining to the attendance of the complainant Sh. Amit Kumar. Accordingly, he produced the same. The said register was shown to the complainant Sh. Amit Kumar. On being shown, the complainant said that accused Fakir Chand Sharma had made entry of his attendance by that day itself, for the period from 09.06.2014 till 12.06.2014, i.e., the day of trap. The entry of attendance of 12.06.2014 was reflecting that Sh. Amit Kumar joined the school on 12.06.2014 at 08:00 hrs. and at 08:00 hrs the complainant was present with the CBI team. Both CC No. 01/15 Page No. 74 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 registers were taken into police possession. Both the independent witnesses were directed to sign on each page of the registers.

145. It is further deposed by PW9 that thereafter, the 4 GB memory card alongwith the DVR inserted in the official laptop by PW9 and the contents of the memory card were transferred in the official laptop for the purpose of investigation. Thereafter the said memory card was taken out and was sealed with the seal of CBI, after packing it in its plastic case, which was marked as Q2. The signatures of both the independent witnesses were obtained on the plastic case. After that the same was kept in a brown colour envelope, which was marked as Q2 and sealed with the seal of CBI. The signatures of both the independent witnesses were also taken on the brown colour envelope.

146. It is further deposed by PW9 that the Personal Search of the accused was taken and a separate Arrestcum Personal Search Memo was prepared. Accused Fakir Chand Sharma was arrested at about 16:00 hrs. The proceedings of the trap were recorded in a Recovery Memo, which was prepared by PW9. The same is Ex.PW1/D, which bears his signatures at point 'E', on each page.

CC No. 01/15 Page No. 75 of 212

CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017

147. It is further deposed by PW9 that a rough site plan of the place of occurrence was also prepared. The same is Ex.PW1/E, which bears his signatures at point 'E'. The ArrestcumPersonal Search Memo of accused Fakir Chand Sharma is Ex.PW5/A, which bears his signatures at point 'C'.

148. It is further deposed by PW9 that while accused Fakir Chand Sharma was asked to sign the Recovery Memo Ex.PW1/D, the complainant Sh. Amit Kumar informed that accused Fakir Chand Sharma is putting his signatures differently. Accordingly, a note at encircled portion Mark F, on the first page of the Recovery Memo, was appended and his thumb impression was also obtained on each page of the Recovery Memo at points 'F'.

149. It is further deposed by PW9 that the facsimile impression of the brass seal was taken with lakh and ink, on the separate white papers and the facsimile of the seal impression was also taken on the Recovery Memo. After sealing the documents, the brass seal was handed over to independent witness Sh. Dharamvir Singh with a direction to produce the same before the Hon'ble Court as and when required.

150. PW9 has identified three glass bottles marked CC No. 01/15 Page No. 76 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 LHW, RHW and Left Side Shirt Pocket Wash, Ex.PW1/Q, Ex.PW1/P and Ex.PW1/R and has stated that these are the same glass bottles in which the LHW, RHW and Left Side Shirt Pocket Wash of the accused were transferred, which bears his signatures at points 'E'.

151. PW9 has identified one cloth pullanda bearing RC DAI2014A0018 sealed with the seal of court (SCR). The cloth pullanda is Ex.PW1/S which bears his signatures at point 'D'. On opening the cloth pullanda, it is found containing one half sleeve checkdar shirt with blue green creamish colour. The said shirt is Ex.PW1/T. The left side pocket of the shirt bears his signatures at point 'D'. He has stated that it is the same shirt from the pocket of which the GC notes were recovered.

152. PW9 has identified a yellow colour envelope Ex.Q2 sealed with the seal of Court (SCR). On opening the same, it is found containing a khakhi colour envelope Ex.PW1/U3. This envelope bears his signatures at point 'D'. On opening the envelope Ex.PW1/U3, it is found containing a micro SD Card 4 GB with a transparent plastic cover. The plastic cover bears his signature at point 'D'. He has stated that this is the same memory card which was used for recording the conversation on 12.06.2014.

CC No. 01/15 Page No. 77 of 212

CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017

153. PW9 has identified brown colour envelope sealed with the seal of court (SCR). On opening the same, it is found containing two envelopes, one of brown colour and another is of yellow colour, which are Ex.PW1/M and Ex.PW1/K, respectively. Both the envelopes bear his signatures at point 'D' and the thumb impression of accused Fakir Chand Sharma at point 'E'. On opening the yellow colour sealed envelope (sealed with the seal of court), it is found containing 09 GC notes already Ex.PW1/L (colly.). He has stated that these are the same GC notes which were recovered from the accused Fakir Chand Sharma on 12.06.2014. On opening the brown colour sealed envelope (sealed with the seal of court), it is found containing 01 GC note Ex.PW1/N. He has stated that this is the same GC note which was handed over by Sh. Amit Kumar during the trap proceedings.

154. PW9 has identified another yellow colour envelope sealed with the seal of court (SCR). On opening the same, it is found containing another envelope Ex.PW5/C. The said envelope bears his signatures at point 'D'. On opening the same, it is found containing a Samsung mobile and battery, which is Ex.PW5/B (colly.). He has stated that this is the mobile phone used by accused Fakir Chand Sharma.

CC No. 01/15 Page No. 78 of 212

CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017

155. It is further deposed by PW9 that on 13.06.2014, sample voice of the accused Fakir Chand Sharma was taken in the presence of independent witness Sh. Ashish Tomar, LDC, DDA, Vikas Sadan and PW9 prepared the Specimen Voice Memorandum dated 13.06.2014, which is Ex.PW7/A, which bears his signatures at point 'B' and the signatures of accused Fakir Chand Sharma at point 'C'.

156. It is further deposed by PW9 that the attendance register for the month of May and June Ex.PW1/DX1, is the same, which was seized by PW9 from Sh. Om Prakash, Vice Principal of the school.

157. PW14 Sh. Om Prakash has deposed that he retired as Vice Principal from Govt. Coed, SSS, Kanganheri, New Delhi110071, on 28.02.2014. Thereafter, he was given reemployment for two years on the same post in the same school.

158. It is further deposed by PW14 that CBI had made inquiries from him in respect of this case. This incident is dated 12.06.2014. On that day, PW14 was present in the school and doing some work in his office. He heard some loud noise outside and came out from his office to know what was happening outside. He saw two people were holding the CC No. 01/15 Page No. 79 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 wrists of Fakir Chand Sharma, the Principal of Govt. Coed, SSS, Kanganheri, New Delhi and the Peon was coming to his chamber for calling him. He came near to the place where the persons were gathered around Fakir Chand Sharma. The persons, who were holding the wrists of Fakir Chand Sharma, inquired about his post. PW14 told them that he was working as Vice Principal in the school. Those people told him that they were CBI officials. They also told PW14 that Fakir Chand Sharma was caught by them in matter of obtaining bribe from Amit Kumar, IT Assistant of the school. They also asked PW14 to remain present with them till they were doing their formalities in this case, in the school. He has correctly identified accused Fakir Chand Sharma, who was present in the court.

159. It is further deposed by PW14 that first of all, search of Fakir Chand Sharma was taken in his presence and Rs.9,000/, in the denomination of Rs.1000/ currency note each were recovered from the left side shirt pocket, which he was wearing. These notes were kept in an envelope and sealed.

160. PW14 has identified a sealed envelope sealed with the court seal, produced and opened. On opening the envelope, it is found containing two envelopes, one yellow CC No. 01/15 Page No. 80 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 colour envelope Ex.PW1/K, which is found containing nine currency notes (old currency notes in circulation at that time) of Rs.1000/ each, which are collectively Ex.PW1/L (Colly.). He has identified his signature at point marked 'F', on the envelope Ex.PW1/K. Another brown colour envelope Ex.PW1/M is found containing one note of Rs.1,000/ (old currency note in circulation at that time), which is Ex.PW1/N. He has identified his signature at point marked 'F', on the envelope Ex.PW1/M. In envelope Ex.PW1/M, one currency note of Rs.1,000/ was sealed after taking it from Sh. Amit Kumar, the IT Assistant.

161. It is further deposed by PW14 that thereafter, CBI personnel taken out a glass from their bag and asked PW14 to bring water in that glass. He directed the Peon to fill the glass with clean water taken from the tap in the school. The Peon brought water in the glass. Then CBI officials told PW 14 that they are going to mix some powder in the water kept in glass. Then a powder was put in the water and glass containing clean water was shaken but the colour of the clean water did not change. Thereafter, accused Fakir Chand Sharma was asked to dip his left hand fingers in the said clean water glass and on dipping the left hand fingers by the accused Fakir Chand Sharma, the clean water of the glass CC No. 01/15 Page No. 81 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 turned into pink colour. The said pink colour water was poured in a bottle and the bottle was sealed and PW14's signatures were obtained on the slip of paper affixed on the bottle itself.

162. It is further deposed by PW14 that one sealed bottle with the seal of 'VBR CFSL' only on the neck of the bottle with white paper fixed on the bottle body is produced, on which LHW RCDAI2014A0018 is written. On seeing the bottle, he has identified the same, which was sealed at the spot and his signatures were obtained on the same. The bottle is Ex.PW1/Q. He has identified his signatures on the paper slip affixed on the bottle at point 'F'.

163. It is further deposed by PW14 that thereafter, CBI personnel taken out another glass from their bag and asked PW14 to bring water in that glass. He directed the Peon to fill the glass with clean water taken from the tap in the school. The Peon brought water in the glass. Then CBI officials told him that they were going to mix some powder in the water kept in glass. Then a powder was put in the water and glass containing clean water was shaken but the colour of the clean water did not change. Thereafter, accused Fakir Chand Sharma was asked to dip his right hand fingers in the said clean water glass and on dipping the right hand fingers CC No. 01/15 Page No. 82 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 by the accused Fakir Chand Sharma, the clean water of the glass turned into pink colour. The said pink colour water was poured in a bottle and the bottle was sealed and PW14's signatures were obtained on the slip of paper affixed on the bottle itself.

164. It is further deposed by PW14 that another sealed bottle with the seal of 'VBR CFSL' only on the neck of the bottle with white paper fixed on the bottle body is produced, on which RHW RCDAI2014A0018 is written. On seeing the bottle, witness has identified the same which was sealed at the spot and his signatures were obtained on the same. The bottle is Ex.PW1/P. Witness has identified his signatures on the paper slip affixed on the bottle at point 'F'.

165. It is further deposed by PW14 that thereafter, CBI personnel taken out another glass from their bag and asked PW14 to bring water in that glass. PW14 directed the Peon to fill the glass with clean water taken from the tap in the school. The Peon brought water in the glass. Then CBI officials told him that they were going to mix some powder in the water kept in glass. Then a powder was put in the water and glass containing clean water was shaken but the colour of the clean water did not change. Thereafter, accused Fakir Chand Sharma was asked to put out his shirt and he was CC No. 01/15 Page No. 83 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 given another shirt. Accused Fakir Chand Sharma taken out his shirt and handed over the same to CBI officials. Then the inner side of the left side pocket of that shirt, from which the currency notes of Rs.9,000/ were recovered, was dipped in the said clean water glass and on dipping the inner side of left side shirt pocket of accused Fakir Chand Sharma, the clean water of the glass turned into pink colour. The said pink colour water was poured in a bottle and the bottle was sealed and his signatures were obtained on the slip of paper affixed on the bottle itself.

166. It is further deposed by PW14 that another sealed bottle with the seal of 'VBR CFSL' only on the neck of the bottle with white paper fixed on the bottle body is produced, on which Left Side Shirt Pocket Wash RCDAI2014A0018 is written. On seeing the bottle, he has identified the same which was sealed at the spot and his signatures were obtained on the same. The bottle is Ex.PW1/R. He has identified his signatures on the paper slip affixed on the bottle at point 'F'. After taking the pocket wash of the shirt, the said shirt was put in the cloth pullanda and was sealed.

167. It is further deposed by PW14 that a sealed cloth pullanda sealed with the court seal, is produced, which is Ex.PW1/S. Witness has identified his signatures on the cloth CC No. 01/15 Page No. 84 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 pullanda at point 'D' and identified the same as the cloth pullanda in which shirt of accused Fakir Chand Sharma was sealed, in his presence.

168. It is further deposed by PW14 that thereafter, CBI officials played a memory card after taking out it from the recorder, in which conversation of Fakir Chand Sharma and Sh. Amit Kumar was recorded by CBI. That memory card was played by using a laptop. Thereafter, the said memory card was sealed in an envelope.

169. It is further deposed by PW14 that a yellow colour envelope sealed with the court seal is produced, which is Ex.PW10/C. The envelope is opened with the permission of the court. It is found contained a brown colour envelope mark Ex.PW1/U3, a plastic memory card wrapper Ex.PW1/U2 and a memory card Ex.PW1/U1.

170. It is further deposed by PW14 that after completing these formalities, CBI officials asked PW14 to produce attendance registers of school staff. The said registers were found on the table of Principal i.e. accused Fakir Chand Sharma. He produced those registers before CBI officials and CBI officials seized both the registers.

171. It is further deposed by PW14 that on being CC No. 01/15 Page No. 85 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 shown staff attendance register of Govt. Coed, Sr. Sec. School, Kanganheri, New Delhi, for the month of April 2014, which contains four sheets of attendance register and 19 sheets of leave applications, etc. given by the staff, PW14 has identified the same, which was seized in his presence. This register was maintained in their school in normal course of officials duties. The same is Ex.PW14/A (Colly.) (D08).

172. PW14 has identified that attendance register of Govt. Coed, Sr. Sec. School, Kanganheri, New Delhi, for the month of May 2014 & June 2014, which contains six sheets of attendance register and 10 sheets of leave applications, etc. as the same register, which was seized in his presence. This register was maintained in their school in normal course of officials duties. The same is Ex.PW14/B (Colly.) (D09).

173. It is further deposed by PW14 that on the spot, CBI officials had brought certain written papers, again said, the papers were written in the school itself including a report of the proceedings running into 15 to 20 sheets and PW14 had signed the same. He has identified his signatures on all the pages of recovery memo Ex.PW1/D, at point 'G'.

174. It is further deposed by PW14 that thereafter, he was also called by the CBI officials to the CBI office 34 times CC No. 01/15 Page No. 86 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 for producing some documents and as and when asked he went to CBI office and produced the requisite documents.

175. PW14 has identified the productioncumseizure memo dated 26.06.2014, as the same vide which certified copy of service book of accused Fakir Chand Sharma and relieving letter and joining letter of Fakir Chand Sharma were seized from him. The productioncumseizure is Ex.PW14/C (D11), which bears his signatures at points 'A' & 'A1'. The certified copy of service book running into 01 to 45 pages is Ex.PW14/D (Colly.) (D12), which bears his certification at point now mark 'A' on first page and his initials on each page at points now mark 'B'. Witness also identified his signatures at points 'A' on the certified copy of joining report and relieving report of accused Fakir Chand Sharma, which was certified by him. The same are Ex.PW14/E (D13, page 01) and Ex.PW14/F (D13, page 02), respectively.

176. PW14 has identified the productioncumseizure memo dated 01.08.2014, vide which some documents alongwith joining letter of Amit Kumar, IT Assistant were seized from him. The productioncumseizure memo is Ex.PW14/G (D23) which bears his signatures at points 'A' & 'A1'.

CC No. 01/15 Page No. 87 of 212

CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017

177. PW14 has identified the joining report of IT Assistant Amit Kumar, dated 07.07.2012, which was handed over by him and seized vide seizure memo Ex.PW14/G. The same is Ex.PW14/H (D24). He has also identified the signatures of Sh. D. S. Kataria, Vice Principal on the same at point now mark 'A'. He has identified the signatures of Sh. D.S. Kataria, as he had worked with Sh. D. S. Kataria and had occasions to see Sh. D. S. Kataria writing and signing.

178. PW14 has identified the attendance report of IT Assistant Sh. Amit Kumar for the period June 2014, and his signatures on the same at point 'A'. PW14 had forwarded this attendance report on 21.07.2014, as the then Principal, Sh. Fakir Chand Sharma was already suspended on 12.06.2014, after his arrest.

179. PW14 has identified the five attendance reports of IT Assistant Sh. Amit Kumar for the months of January to May 2014, and signatures of Sh. Fakir Chand Sharma at points mark 'A'. These attendance reports are collectively Ex.PW1/DX (Colly.) (D32).

180. PW2 Sh. Binay Bhushan has deposed that in December 2014, he remained posted as Additional Director of Education (vig), Old Secretariat Building, New Delhi. CBI had CC No. 01/15 Page No. 88 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 forwarded the documents/statement of witnesses recorded by the IO during the investigation for obtaining the sanction for prosecution against accused Fakir Chand Sharma, the then Principal, Government CoEd Sr. Secondary School, Kanganheri, New Delhi. His Excellency Lt. Governor, NCT of Delhi was the competent authority to remove accused Fakir Chand Sharma, the then Principal from his office, after fully and carefully examining the facts and circumstances of the case RC No.18(A)/2014/CBI/ACB/New Delhi and after going through the statement of witnesses, documents and material placed, his Excellency Lt. Governor granted sanction for prosecution for the prosecution of accused Fakir Chand Sharma and he authenticated the same by signing the sanction order no. DE.7/1182/Vig/HQ/PL/2014/4791 dated 29.12.2014, Ex.PW2/A, bearing his signatures at point A.

181. PW7 Sh. Ashish Tomar has deposed that on 13.06.2014, he visited the office of CBI and met with Sh. Ramesh Chand Sharma, Inspector who introduced him to Sh. Fakir Chand Sharma.

182. It is further deposed by PW7 that Sh. Ramesh Kumar Inspector obtained the specimen voice of Fakir Chand Sharma in a micro SD card by using a new mobile phone. Thereafter the said micro SD card was sealed with the seal of CC No. 01/15 Page No. 89 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 CBI. Thereafter, he prepared a specimen voice memorandum dated 13.06.2014 and signed the same.

183. PW7 has identified the specimen voice memorandum dated 13.06.2014 Ex.PW7/A, which bears his signatures at point A on each page.

184. PW4 Sh. Anuj Bhatia is Nodal Officer of Vodafone. He has deposed that he was working as Nodal Officer with Vodafone Mobile Services Ltd., office situated at C45, Okhla PhaseII, New Delhi110020, since 2009.

185. It is further deposed by PW4 that vide ProductioncumSeizure Memo dated 24.07.2014, he had forwarded the original Customer Application Form (CAF) of mobile no. 9711491499 alongwith its annexures and Call Detail Record alongwith Certificate u/Sec. 65B (4)(c) of the Evidence Act 1872 to Sh. Gursewak Singh, Inspector, CBI, ACB, New Delhi, who had prepared the aforesaid Production cumSeizure Memo which bears his signatures at point 'A' and the same is Ex.PW4/A (D38). The original CAF of the mobile no. 9711491499 is Ex.PW1/J (Colly.) and the Call Detail Record is Ex.PW4/B (D40), which bears his signatures and seal of office at point 'A'. The certificate u/Sec. 65B (4)(c) Indian Evidence Act is Ex.PW4/C (D41), CC No. 01/15 Page No. 90 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 which bears his signatures and seal of his office at point 'A'.

186. PW11 Sh. Rajeev Rathi has deposed that he was one of the director of M/s Computers Clinic India Pvt. Ltd. since 1996. Their company deals with IT services. His company was earlier empaneled with IT Department of Government of NCT of Delhi. The Directorate of Education had floated an open Etender for providing services of IT assistants in 500 Delhi Government's schools in 2012. His company received the said tender being L1 bidder. In June 2012, an agreement to the said effect had been signed by him on behalf of his company and by the Director, Directorate of Education, Government of NCT of Delhi. Accordingly, they started providing IT Assistants to the various schools since July 2012.

187. It is further deposed by PW11 that as per agreement, payment was to be made on the basis of monthly attendance of the performance report received from the respective heads of the schools. On receipt of the same, they submit consolidated reports of all the schools to the Directorate of Education and on the basis of that payment issued to be released to them. Thereafter, they used to make payment to the respective IT Assistants within one week of receipt of payment. The head of the school issues attendance CC No. 01/15 Page No. 91 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 record in triplicate, out of which one copy is taken by them as an acknowledgement, one copy goes to the Directorate of Education and one copy remains with them.

188. It is further deposed by PW11 that Sh. Amit Kumar was deployed through their company in Government Coed, Senior Secondary School, Kangan Heri, New Delhi71, School ID 1821034, since July 2012. Sh. F. C. Sharma was the Principal of this school, who used to send monthly attendance/ performance report of Sh. Amit Kumar to their company.

189. It is further deposed by PW11 that during investigation, he was called by the CBI thrice and he responded the same and provided relevant documents to the CBI, which were seized by CBI by preparing Seizure Memos.

190. PW11 has identified Seizure Memo dated 02.07.2014, which he had supplied document mentioned therein to Sh. Gursewak Singh, Inspector, CBI, ACB, New Delhi. The same bears his signature at point 'A' and is Ex.PW11/A (D14).

191. It is further deposed by PW11 that the attested copy of agreement dated 19.06.2012 executed between the Director of Education, Government of NCT of Delhi and M/s CC No. 01/15 Page No. 92 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 Computer Clinic India Pvt. Ltd. is provided by him to the Investigating Officer. The same bears his signatures at points 'A', on each page and is Ex.PW11/B (D15).

192. It is further deposed by PW11 that three original attendance reports of Sh. Amit Kumar, IT Assistant for March, April and May 2014 were received in their company from the Government Coed, Senior Secondary School, Kangan Heri, New Delhi, which also given to the Investigating Officer. The same are Ex.PW11/C (Colly.) (D16, 3 sheets). He has identify the signatures of Sh. F. C. Sharma, Principal, on each sheet of Ex.PW11/C (Colly.) at points 'A', as they used to receive monthly reports sent by him in normal course of their official dealings.

193. It is further deposed by PW11 that a certified copy of payment sheet of his company was also supplied by him to the Investigating Officer, which bears his signature at point 'A' and Ex.PW11/D (D17).

194. PW11 has identified Seizure Memo dated 04.07.2014, Ex.PW11/E (D18), he has stated that vide the said Seizure Memo, he had supplied document mentioned therein to Sh. Gursewak Singh, Inspector, CBI, ACB, New Delhi. The same bears his signature at point 'A'.

CC No. 01/15 Page No. 93 of 212

CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017

195. It is further deposed by PW11 that vide Seizure Memo Ex.PW11/E, he had supplied certified copies of extension letters dated 18.09.2013, 24.12.2013, 31.03.2014 regarding extension of agreement period. The same bears his signatures at points 'A' and are Ex.PW11/F (D19), Ex.PW11/G (D20) and Ex.PW11/H (D20).

196. It is further deposed by PW11 that he had also supplied certified copy of letter of appointment for Fix Contract Employment of Sh. Amit Kumar, which bears his signatures at points 'A' and the same is Ex.PW11/I (D22).

197. It is further deposed by PW11 that at the time of appointment of Sh. Amit Kumar with Government Coed Senior Secondary School, Kangan Heri, New Delhi, he had given his joining letter that was to be returned by Head of the school. They did not receive the acknowledgement back from the school. However, the attendance reports have been provided by the Principal with its joining date and satisfactory work done.

198. PW12 Sh. K. K. Malhotra has deposed that Presently, he is working as Accounts Officer, Sports Branch, Directorate of Education. Earlier, he was working as Accounts Officer in the Directorate of Education at Old Patrachar CC No. 01/15 Page No. 94 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 Vidyalaya Building, Timarpur, Delhi, from April 2013 to February 2016.

199. It is further deposed by PW12 that during his posting as above in the year 2014, CBI had sought documents relating to M/s Computer Clinic India (Pvt.) Ltd., who was their contractor for providing IT Assistants in 500 Government schools in Delhi. He had provided the said documents to CBI. A ProductioncumSeizure Memo was prepared in this regard. The ProductioncumSeizure Memo dated 07.10.2014 is Ex.PW12/A (D25), which bears his signatures on both pages at points 'A' & 'A1'. He was also provided a copy of memo Ex.PW12/A and his receiving is encircled at point now marked 'B' on Ex.PW12/A.

200. It is further deposed by PW12 that the original agreement dated 19.06.2012 between Director of Education, Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi and M/s Computer Clinic India (Pvt.) Ltd. including its annexure 'A', was seized vide ProductioncumSeizure Memo Ex.PW12/A mentioned at Sr. No. 1, which is Ex.PW12/B (D26). The agreement has been signed by Sh. Amit Singla, the then Director of Education on each page of the agreement. He has identified his initials on pages 01 to 10 at points marked 'A' and his full signature on page 11 at point 'A1'. He identified CC No. 01/15 Page No. 95 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 the signatures of Sh. Amit Singla as he worked under him and had occasions to see him writing and signing.

201. It is further deposed by PW12 that the original office copy of extension letter dated 07.08.2013 in respect of extension of contract of M/s Computer Clinic India (Pvt.) Ltd., was seized vide ProductioncumSeizure Memo Ex.PW12/A mentioned at Sr. No. 2, is Ex.PW12/C (D27). The same has been signed by Sh. Santosh Bahera, the then EDP Manager (CEP/IT). He has identified his signatures at points 'A' & 'A1' on Ex.PW12/C.

202. It is further deposed by PW12 that the original office copy of extension letter dated 18.09.2013 in respect of extension of contract of M/s Computer Clinic India (Pvt.) Ltd., was seized vide ProductioncumSeizure Memo Ex.PW12/A mentioned at Sr. No. 3, is Ex.PW12/D (D28). The same has been signed by Sh. Santosh Bahera, the then Joint Director, (CEP/IT). He has identified his signatures at points 'A' & 'A1' on Ex.PW12/D.

203. It is further deposed by PW12 that the original office copy of extension letter dated 24.12.2013 in respect of extension of contract of M/s Computer Clinic India (Pvt.) Ltd., was seized vide ProductioncumSeizure Memo CC No. 01/15 Page No. 96 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 Ex.PW12/A mentioned at Sr. No. 4, is Ex.PW12/E (D29). The same has been signed by Sh. Santosh Bahera, the then Joint Director, (CEP/IT). He has identified his signatures at points 'A' & 'A1' on Ex.PW12/E.

204. It is further deposed by PW12 that the original office copy of extension letter dated 31.03.2014 in respect of extension of contract of M/s Computer Clinic India (Pvt.) Ltd., was seized vide ProductioncumSeizure Memo Ex.PW12/A mentioned at Sr. No. 5, is Ex.PW12/F (D30). The same has been signed by Sh. Santosh Bahera, the then Joint Director, (CEP/IT). He has identified his signatures at points 'A' & 'A1' on Ex.PW12/F.

205. It is further deposed by PW12 that the original office copy of extension letter dated 28.07.2014 in respect of extension of contract of M/s Computer Clinic India (Pvt.) Ltd., was seized vide ProductioncumSeizure Memo Ex.PW12/A mentioned at Sr. No. 6, is Ex.PW12/G (D31). The same has been signed by Sh. Santosh Bahera, the then Joint Director, (CEP/IT). He has identified his signatures at points 'A' & 'A1' on Ex.PW12/G.

206. It is further deposed by PW12 that the six original attendance reports of IT Assistant Sh. Amit Kumar, CC No. 01/15 Page No. 97 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 for the period January 2014 to June 2014, which were seized vide Seizure Memo Ex.PW12/A and mentioned at Sr. No. 7, are Ex.PW1/DX (Colly.) (D32, pages 01 to 06).

207. It is further deposed by PW12 that the attendance reports Ex.PW1/DX (Colly.) were received in their office through contractor alongwith his bill. The attendance reports used to be sent by the respective schools, where the IT Assistant was working.

208. It is further deposed by PW12 that the original office copy of expenditure sanction dated 26.05.2014 of Rs.54,85,415/ for the month of March 2014 alongwith invoice dated 11.04.2014 and monthly attendance sheets for the month of March 2014 (29 pages), were seized vide Seizure Memo Ex.PW12/A mentioned at Sr. No. 8, is Ex.PW12/H (Colly.) (D33), which bears signatures of Sh. Santosh Bahera, the then Joint Director (CEP/IT) at points A.

209. It is further deposed by PW12 that the original office copy of expenditure sanction dated 21.07.2014 of Rs.1,16,45,928/ for the month of April 2014 & May 2014 alongwith invoice dated 10.05.2014 and 14.06.2014 and monthly attendance sheets for the respective months (65 pages), were seized vide Seizure Memo Ex.PW12/A CC No. 01/15 Page No. 98 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 mentioned at Sr. No. 9, is Ex.PW12/J (Colly.) (D34), which bears signatures of Sh. Santosh Bahera, the then Joint Director (CEP/IT) at points 'A'.

210. PW13 Sh. Rajeev Ranjan, Nodal Officer, TATA Tele Services, has deposed that he was working as Nodal Officer, since September 2011. CBI had sought information with regard to mobile no. 9278651036, which was issued from TATA Tele Services. They had provided the original Customer Application Form (CAF), Call Detail Records from10.06.2014 to 12.06.2014 alongwith certificate issued u/Sec. 65B of the Indian Evidence Act. He had deputed his Junior Nodal Officer Sh. Rajiv Vashishth to produce the afore mentioned documents to the CBI.

211. It is further deposed by PW13 that the ProductioncumSeizure Memo dated 16.07.2014, vide which the aforementioned documents had been seized, is Ex.PW13/A (D42), which bears signatures of Sh. Rajiv Vashishth, Nodal Officer, TATA Tele Services at point marked 'A'. He has identified the signature of Sh. Rajiv Vashishth as he had worked with PW13 and PW13 had occasions to see him writing and signing.

212. It is further deposed by PW13 that the original CC No. 01/15 Page No. 99 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 Customer Application Form (CAF) in respect of mobile no. 9278651036 in the name of F. C. Sharma alongwith copy of driving licence of Fakir Chand Sharma is collectively Ex.PW13/B (Colly.) (D43).

213. It is further deposed by PW13 that the Call Detail Records (CDRs) for the period 10.06.2014 to 12.06.2014 is Ex.PW13/C (D44). The same bears his initials and seal at point marked 'A'. The certificate u/Sec. 65B of Indian Evidence Act in respect of CDR Ex.PW13/C is Ex.PW13/D (D45), which bears his signatures and seal at point A & A1.

214. PW3 Sh. V. B. Ramteke deposed that he was M.Sc. in Chemistry and also hold Post Graduate Diploma in Forensic Chemistry including Toxicology from National Institute of Criminology and Forensic Science, Delhi. He has more than 19 years of experience in the field of chemical analysis.

215. PW3 has identified letter no. DAI2014A 0018/DLI/819/ dated 24.06.2014, vide which, the Superintendent of Police, CBI, ACB, New Delhi, forwarded three sealed bottles for laboratory examination and Expert opinion, which were received in CFSL, New Delhi on 24.06.2014. The exhibit bottles were sealed with the seal of CC No. 01/15 Page No. 100 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 CBI, ACB, ND.65/2013. The seals were intact and tallied with the specimen seal sent with the forwarding letter. The exhibit bottles were marked as Ex.LHW, Ex.RHW and Ex.Left Side Shirt Pocket Wash. The contents of the bottles were examined separately by chemical tests. On chemical examination, all the above exhibits found containing Phenolphthalein. The remnants of the exhibits were sealed with his seal VBR, CHEM, DIV, CFSL, CBI, NEW DELHI. The cloth wrappers alongwith seal impression removed from exhibit bottles were also sealed in an envelope and were sent to forwarding authority alongwith his chemical examination report.

216. PW3 has identified his report no. CFSL2014/C 924, dated 03.07.2014, which bears his signatures at points 'A', on each page, and the same is Ex.PW3/A (D48). The copy of the letter vide which the aforesaid bottles were forwarded to CFSL, is Ex.PW3/B (D46).

217. PW3 has identified three glass bottles as Ex.1/P, Ex.1/Q & Ex.1/R as the same bottles, which were examined by him and each bottle bears his signatures at point 'B'.

218. PW3 has identified a sealed envelope with the seal of VBR, CHEM, DIV, CFSL, CBI, NEW DELHI, which is CC No. 01/15 Page No. 101 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 opened and is found containing three cloth wrappers with the seal of CBI. These are the same wrappers vide which the aforesaid bottles Ex.1/P, Ex.1/Q and Ex.1/R were found sealed when the bottles were received in CFSL. The each aforesaid wrapper bears his signatures at point 'A' and are Ex.PW3/C (Colly.) and the sealed envelope is Ex.PW3/D, which bears his signatures at point 'A'.

219. PW10 Sh. Deepak Kumar Tanwar, who is Scientific Officer GradeI (Physics) has deposed that he was M.Sc. (Phy.), M. Phil. (Phy.) and also done a certificate course in Forensic Science. He has been working in the field of voice examination for the last more than 20 years. During this period, he has examined the voices of thousand persons and opined on them. He has also deposed in the different courts of the country in respect of his voice examination reports. He has also undergone one month's training on the subject "Speaker Identification & Allied Areas" from University of Trier, Germany.

220. It is further deposed by PW10 that in this case, his office received three sealed parcels marked Q1, Q2, S1 and specimen seal impression and transcript of recorded conversation vide letter no. DAI2014A0018/8198, dated 24.06.2014 from SP, CBI, ACB, New Delhi for voice CC No. 01/15 Page No. 102 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 examination.

221. It is further deposed by PW10 that the parcel mark Q1 was opened and it was found containing memory card of make Kingston of 4GB capacity. The card was read and found containing three recorded conversations of respective duration 33 seconds, 15 seconds and 29 minutes 21 seconds, mark Ex.Q1 (1) to Ex.Q1 (3), respectively. In the recorded conversation mark Ex.Q1 (1) the voice of a person starting with the sentence "Hello, Namaskar, haan Amit, haan ghar pe aa jana...", mark Ex.Q1(1)(F). In the recorded conversation mark Ex.Q1 (2), the voice of a person starting with a sentence "Hello, haan bas pahunch raha hoon haan...." mark Ex.Q1(2)(F). In the recorded conversation mark Ex.Q1 (3), the voice of a person starting with a sentence "Aa, laiyio, Narender stamp la...." mark Ex.Q1(3) (F). Some common clue sentences / words were selected from the questioned voice mark Ex.Q1 (1)(F) and Ex.Q1(3) (F) for voice spectrographic analysis with respect to specimen voice of Fakir Chand Sharma. All these words/ sentences are mentioned in his report.

222. It is further deposed by PW10 that the parcel mark Q2 was opened and it was found containing memory card of make Kingston of 4GB capacity. The card was read CC No. 01/15 Page No. 103 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 and found containing two recorded conversations of respective duration 50 seconds and 32 minutes 51 seconds, mark Ex.Q2(1) and Ex.Q2(2), respectively. In the recorded conversation mark Ex.Q2 (1) the voice of a person starting with the sentence "Hello, Namaskar, Amit aa raha hai...", mark Ex.Q2(1)(F). In the recorded conversation mark Ex.Q 2 (2), the voice of a person starting with a sentence "Nikaal ke la, hajri laga le, arey bijli na ave, arey le isko ek to dispatch kar de...." mark Ex.Q2(2)(F). Some common clue sentences / words were selected from the questioned voice mark Ex.Q 2(1)(F) and Ex.Q2(2)(F) for voice spectrographic analysis with respect to specimen voice of Fakir Chand Sharma. All these words/ sentences are mentioned in his report.

223. It is further deposed by PW10 that the parcel mark S1 was opened and it was found containing micro SD card of make Kingston of 4GB capacity. The card was read and found containing specimen voice recording of Fakir Chand Sharma, of duration 01 minute and 51 seconds, mark Ex.S1 (F). The specimen voice of Fakir Chand Sharma starting with the sentence, "Ghar pe aa jana (three times)....." mark Ex.S1 (F). Some common clue sentences / words were selected from the specimen voice mark Ex.S1(F) for voice spectrographic analysis. All these words/ sentences are CC No. 01/15 Page No. 104 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 mentioned in his report.

224. It is further deposed by PW10 that the auditory examination of the questioned voices mark Ex.Q 1(1)(F) to Ex.Q1(3)(F), Ex.Q2(1)(F) & Ex.Q2(2)(F) and specimen voice of Fakir Chand Sharma revealed that they are similar in respect of their linguistic and phonetic features. The subsequent voice spectrographic examination of common clue sentences/ words were selected from questioned and specimen voice of Fakir Chand Sharma mark Ex.S1(F) revealed that they were similar in respect of their formant frequencies distribution, intonation pattern, number of formants and other general visual features in the voicegram. On the basis of above said examination, he concluded that the questioned voices mark Ex.Q 1(1)(F) to Ex.Q1(3)(F), Ex.Q2(1)(F) & Ex.Q2(2)(F) are the probable voice of the person namely Fakir Chand Sharma, whose specimen voice is marked Ex.S1 (F).

225. It is further deposed by PW10 that Waveform, spectrographic and critical auditory examination of audio recordings contained in the memory cards mark Ex.Q1 and Ex.Q2 and micro SD card mark Ex.S1 revealed that audio recordings are continuous and no form of tampering detected.

CC No. 01/15 Page No. 105 of 212

CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017

226. It is further deposed by PW10 that after examination of all three exhibits mark Q1, Q2 and S1 were returned alongwith their original packing in three separately sealed parcels, sealed with his official seal alongwith his report no. CFSL2014/P925, dated 22.01.2015, Ex.PW10/A to forwarding authority, which bears his signature at point 'A' on each page.

227. It is further deposed by PW10 that the yellow coloured envelope bears his signatures at point 'A' and the same is Ex.PW10/B. On opening the same, it is found containing a brown colour envelope Ex.PW1/U, which bears his signatures at point 'E'. On opening the same, it is found containing a memory card. The plastic cover of the same bears his signature at point 'X' and the memory card also bears his signature at point 'X1'. After seeing the same, he has stated that this is the same memory card, which he had received and examined.

228. It is further deposed by PW10 that the yellow colour envelope bears his signatures at point 'A' and the same is Ex.PW10/C. On opening the same, it is found containing a brown coloured envelope Ex.PW1/U3, which bears his signatures at point 'E'. On opening the same, it is found containing a memory card. The plastic cover of the same CC No. 01/15 Page No. 106 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 bears his signature at point 'X2' and the memory card also bears his signature at point 'X3'. After seeing the same, he has stated that this is the same memory card, which he had received and examined.

229. It is further deposed by PW10 that the yellow colour envelope bears his signature at point 'A' and the same is Ex.PW10/D. On opening the same, it is found containing a brown coloured envelope in open condition, which bears his signature at point 'A' and is Ex.PW10/E. On opening the same, it is found containing a micro SD card in its plastic cover. The plastic cover of the same bears his signature at point 'A' and the same is Ex.PW10/F. The micro SD card also bears his signature at point 'B'. After seeing the same, he has stated that this is the same micro SD card, which he had received and examined.

230. PW15 Insp. Gur Sewak Singh has deposed that he remained posted on deputation in CBI, Anti Corruption Branch (ACB) as Inspector from April 2012 to May 2015.

231. It is further deposed by PW15 that investigation of the present case was handed over to him by the orders of the then SP, CBI, ACB, Delhi on 13/06/2014. He had taken over the charge of this case along with the documents/ CC No. 01/15 Page No. 107 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 articles seized or prepared from its first IO Inspector Ramesh Kumar vide case diary.

232. It is further deposed by PW15 that during investigation, he had recorded the statements of relevant witnesses, seized the documents from different authorities as well as from the mobile service providers, got the exhibits of this case sent to chemical examiner and voice examiners of CFSL for their examination. He had also get the voices identified through complainant vide voice identification memo in presence of both the independent recovery witnesses and also got prepared a transcription of the conversations recorded with the help of witnesses and complainant. He had received the reports from CFSL. After completion of investigation, he had obtained sanction for prosecution against the accused from the competent authority and filed charge sheet before the court.

233. It is further deposed by PW15 that vide production cum seizure memo dated 26/06/2014 Ex.PW14/C (D11) he had seized documents mentioned therein from Sh. Om Prakash, Vice Principal, Government Co Ed. Senior Secondary School, Kangan Heri, New Delhi, which bears his signatures at point B. CC No. 01/15 Page No. 108 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017

234. It is further deposed by PW15 that vide production cum seizure memo dated 02/07/2014 Ex.PW11/A (D14), he had seized documents mentioned therein from Sh. Rajiv Rathi, Director (Works), Computer Clinic India, Pvt. Ltd., which bears his signatures at point B.

235. It is further deposed by PW15 that vide production cum seizure memo dated 04/07/2014 Ex.PW11/E (D18), he had seized documents mentioned therein from Sh. Rajiv Rathi, Director (Works), Computer Clinic India, Pvt. Ltd., which bears his signatures at point B.

236. It is further deposed by PW15 that vide production cum seizure memo dated 01/08/2014 Ex.PW14/G (D23) he had seized documents mentioned therein from Sh. Om Prakash, Vice Principal, Government Co Ed. Senior Secondary School, Kangan Heri, New Delhi which bears his signatures at point B.

237. It is further deposed by PW15 that vide production cum seizure memo dated 07/10/2014 Ex.PW12/A (D25) he had seized documents mentioned therein from Sh. K.K. Malhotra, Account Officer, Directorate of Education, which bears his signatures at point B.

238. It is further deposed by PW15 that vide CC No. 01/15 Page No. 109 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 production cum seizure memo dated 24/07/2014 Ex.PW4/A (D38), he had seized documents mentioned therein from Sh. Anuj Bhatia, Nodal Officer, Vodafone Mobile Services Ltd., which bears his signatures at point B.

239. It is further deposed by PW15 that vide production cum seizure memo dated 16/07/2014 Ex.PW13/A (D42) he had seized documents mentioned therein from Sh. Rajiv Vasisth, Nodal Officer, TATA Tele Services Ltd. which bears his signatures at point B.

240. It is further deposed by PW15 that voice identification memo dated 17.07.2014 Ex.PW1/F (D35) was prepared by him. The same bears his signatures at point 'D'. Witness has also identify his signatures on all the 22 pages at points 'D' on Ex.PW1/G (D36), which is rough transcription of the recorded conversation which took place between the accused and the complainant during the verification proceedings on 10.06.2014 (Q1). PW15 has also identified his signatures on all the 17 pages at points 'D' on Ex.PW1/H (D37), which is rough transcription of the recorded conversation took place between the accused and the complainant during the proceedings on 12.06.2014 (Q2).

241. It is further deposed by PW15 that vide CC No. 01/15 Page No. 110 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 forwarding letter dated 24.06.2014, Ex.PW3/B (D46) sent by Sh. D.K. Barik, Superintendent of Police, CBI, ACB, New Delhi to the Director, CFSL, CBI, New Delhi, hands and pocket wash of the accused were sent for examination. After seeing the same, he has stated that this forwarding letter was prepared by him and bears signatures of the then S.P., Sh. D.K. Barik at point 'A'. He has also identified signatures of Sh. D.K. Barik on the certificate enclosed with the forwarding letter at point 'B'. He has identified the signatures of Sh. D.K. Barik as he was his S.P. and he had occasion to see him writing and signing.

242. It is further deposed by PW15 vide forwarding letter dated 24.06.2014, Ex.PW15/A (D47) sent by Sh. D.K. Barik, Superintendent of Police, CBI, ACB, New Delhi to the Director, CFSL, CBI, New Delhi vide which sealed memory cards mark Q1 and Q2 along with sealed memory card mark S1 were sent for examination. After seeing the same, he has stated that this forwarding letter was prepared by him and bears signatures of the then S.P., Sh. D.K. Barik at point 'A'. He has also identify signatures of Sh. D.K. Barik on the certificate enclosed with the forwarding letter at point 'B'.

Defence Evidence

243. In his defence, accused has examined only one CC No. 01/15 Page No. 111 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 witness, namely, DW1 Sh. Durgesh Kumar, UDC in the office of Deputy Director, Education, SouthWest, B, Najafgarh, New Delhi.

244. I have heard Sh. Manoj Shukla, Ld. Senior Public Prosecutor on behalf of CBI and Sh. N. C. Sharma, Ld. counsel for the accused. I have also gone through the records.

245. It is contended by Ld. counsel for the accused that the prosecution has failed to prove that there was any demand from the accused at any point of time. The accused has been falsely implicated in the present case by the complainant in collusion and connivance with the colleagues of his father, who was also working in the CBI, as the complainant had asked for experience certificate from accused (Principal) and he refused for the same as the complainant was employee of his company not of school and he was working in the school on basis of contract of his company.

246. It is further contended by Ld. counsel for the accused that the alleged Shadow witness Shri Sunil Thapliyal as PW5 (who was also the witness of Verification) in his statement has deposed that he reached in the office of CBI on 10.06.2014 at 10.00 A.M. and remained with Duty Officer up CC No. 01/15 Page No. 112 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 to 3.00 to 4.00 on that day, whereas as per prosecution story and the complainant PW1, the complainant reached at CBI office at 10.00 a.m. and left the office of CBI at 12.15 noon along with PW5 & PW8 for verification of complaint, Hence it is surprizing as to how the CBI was in anticipation of complaint to be lodged by the complainant PW1 on that day and witness PW5 was called in advance. Even otherwise, PW5 has specifically deposed in his statement that he remained with Duty officer from 10.00 to 3.004.00 pm., hence going with complainant for alleged verification at the house of accused is a false story and no such Verification was ever conducted. Even otherwise in his crossexamination, PW1 has deposed that he reached in the CBI office on 10.06.2014 at about 10.00 a.m. and the witness was called at 11.45 a.m.

247. It is further contended by Ld. counsel for the accused that the complainant has refused to take the alleged shadow witness with him to the accused, hence the witness was neither present with complainant at the time of alleged demand nor at the time of alleged recording, hence the alleged recordings were easy to manipulate.

248. It is further contended by Ld. counsel for the accused that the complainant PW1 deposed that on CC No. 01/15 Page No. 113 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 10.06.2014 after alleged verification "CBI officer asked me to arrange a sum of Rs.10,000/ and I asked them to give me one or two days time to arrange the said amount"

249. It is further contended by Ld. counsel for the accused that the prosecution has failed to prove as to how and when the raid was directed or planned for 12.06.2014 and on whose instruction all the persons including complainant and witnesses were assembled in the office of CBI in morning at 6.00/6.30 a.m. without registration of the case, on 12.06.2014.

250. It is further contended by Ld. counsel for the accused that the prosecution has failed to prove that in case the complaint was verified by the CBI on 10.06.2014, why the case was not registered on 11.06.2014 and the complainant and witnesses were not called by CBI with prior intimation about alleged raid of 12.06.2014.

251. It is further contended by Ld. counsel for the accused that the prosecution has miserably failed to prove as to how and by whom the raiding team was constituted and when the complainant, witnesses and other members were called by whom and through which information. The CC No. 01/15 Page No. 114 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 complainant and witnesses were not called by the CBI officials in advance as the complainant has never intimated that he was ready with the currency and would come on that day, hence it is surprising as to how all these persons including complainant, witnesses and other members of team reached on 12.06.2014 at CBI office at 6.00 a.m.

252. It is further contended by Ld. counsel for the accused that the complainant PW1 has deposed that when he reached on 12.06.2014, the shadow witness, independent witnesses and other members of raiding team were already present in the CBI office, whereas the PW5 and PW6 both have also deposed that when they reached in the office of CBI, the complainant and other witness as well as all raiding team members were already present in the CBI office.

253. It is further contended by Ld. counsel for the accused that as per prosecution story the complainant has visited the CBI office on 10.06.2014, whereas as per document Ex.PW1/DX1 (D9), the complainant was present in the school as per attendance register from 8.00 a.m. to 2.00 p.m. on 10.06.2014 & 11.06.2014, hence the story of the prosecution can not be relied upon and the same is full of clouds of doubt.

CC No. 01/15 Page No. 115 of 212

CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017

254. It is further contended by Ld. counsel for the accused that the prosecution/CBI firstly has to prove as to what was the reason, for which there was demand, if any, by the accused from complainant. In the present case as per complaint the demand was for issuance of monthly attendance certificate to complainant for release of his salary for which accused demanded Rs.10,000/.

255. It is further contended by Ld. counsel for the accused that present case was registered on 12.06.2014, whereas upto date attendance certificate of complainant has already been signed by the accused on 10.06.2014 and has already been submitted/deposited by complainant to his office allegedly on 11.06.2014.

256. It is further contended by Ld. counsel for the accused that the attendance certificate upto month of May 2014 has already been signed and the contract/job of the complainant was only up to 30th une 2014 i.e. he lodged the complaint only in the last month of his service not prior to that, if there was any grievances.

257. It is further contended by Ld. counsel for the accused that it is unbelievable that the salary of complainant was less than Rs.10,000/ and his job was left only for one CC No. 01/15 Page No. 116 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 month, even then he was agreed to pay the alleged bribe of Rs.10,000/ i.e. more than his one month salary, which he had to get from the school.

258. It is further contended by Ld. counsel for the accused that the complainant despite receipt of signed certificate has falsely implicated the accused in the present case, where as he has failed to disclose as to of which month, he could not get his monthly attendance certificate duly signed from Accused/Principal, when his salary was not paid or any penalty, as alleged, was imposed by the company due to any act of accused.

259. It is further contended by Ld. counsel for the accused that the prosecution/CBI has alleged that they verified the complaint of the complainant but surprisingly it was not verified that the accused was allegedly demanding the bribe amount to do what favour or has misused his duty and powers to give what favour to the complainant. The CBI officials/PW's have specifically admitted that no attendance certificate, which was issued by the accused in lieu of alleged bribe, was ever seized by any of the officials/CBI. Even the CBI officials have not bothered to verify about the alleged Attendance Certificate.

CC No. 01/15 Page No. 117 of 212

CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017

260. It is further contended by Ld. counsel for the accused that the Accused has admittedly signed the Attendance Certificate of complainant prior to registration of FIR/RC, hence there was no occasion of raising any demand or paying or receiving any such alleged bribe moreso when the complainant's job was only left for one month.

261. It is further contended by Ld. counsel for the accused that it is admitted case of the prosecution and the witnesses that the job of preparing the attendance certificate and marking of attendance and submission of said certificate was the job of complainant himself. It is further contended that this is not the case of prosecution that the complainant has prepared the attendance certificate on early dates but the principal has not signed the same. In fact, the accused had signed the said attendance certificate as and when the same were prepared and presented by the complainant to get the signature on each and every month. It is further contended that even in the present case, it is crystal clear that the attendance certificates of complainant duly signed by principle of the school were already lying deposited with the office of complainant month wise and none of the certificate was pending. Hence the alleged complaint of complainant is appears to be false on its mere perusal.

CC No. 01/15 Page No. 118 of 212

CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017

262. It is further contended by Ld. counsel for the accused that under the circumstances, the prosecution has failed to prove the alleged demand by the accused.

263. It is further contended by Ld. counsel for the accused that PW8 Ins. Arjun Kumar Mouria has deposed that after alleged verification of the complainant he directed the complainant to attend the CBI office as and when required and he would call him.

264. It is further contended by Ld. counsel for the accused that to bring the case in the ambit of commission of offences the prosecution has to prove that there was a demand beyond any reasonable doubt and in the present case the prosecution has failed to prove that there was any demand from the accused. It is further contended that in the present case, none of the witness except complainant has proved or deposed that the accused raised any demand in their presence from the complainant.

265. It is further contended by Ld. counsel for the accused that the prosecution has attempted to prove the demand by way of alleged voice recording between the complainant and accused. The said Voice recording has not been proved as per law and it is crystal clear that the alleged CC No. 01/15 Page No. 119 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 voice recordings are false, frivolous, forged, fabricated and manipulated by the CBI with a malafide purpose to prove the present case. The alleged Voice Recordings are not admissible in the eyes of law as per law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court as well as by Hon'ble High Court of Delhi on the following grounds:

i. That it is admitted case that no independent or alleged independent witness has supported or witness to alleged transactions. None of the witness has joined the alleged voice recording.

ii. That the alleged voice recordings and FSL Reports are manipulated which is crystal clear from the fact that the file names, details of parcels in which the memory card allegedly sealed are different in Report and Seizure memo, evidence, Transcript is not matching with the alleged voice recordings as per FSL report.

iii. That as per statement of PW10 and FSL Report Ex.PW10/A the recording was received by the FSL along with transcript on 24/06/2014 whereas the transcript was prepared on 17/07/2014, hence it is crystal clear that the alleged recording and report is false and manipulated for the purpose of this case, as CC No. 01/15 Page No. 120 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 on 24.06.2014 there was no transcript as per prosecution story as the same was prepared on 17.07.2014.

iv. That as per Report Ex.PW10/A the parcels Q1, Q2 & S1 were brown coloured paper envelope and the same were contained Memory Cards Ex. Q1, Ex. Q2 & Ex. S1 whereas as per parcel and Seizure Memos the memory cards were in Plastic Box but there was no Plastic Box at the time of opening parcels in FSL.

v. That as per report the Expert has reported that the files 140610_001, 140612_001 & 140612_002 are voice of independent witnesses but on what basis he has identified their voice. In fact, he has relied upon the transcript only supplied to him.

The prosecution has also failed to prove as to who called the complainant and witnesses on 17.07.2014 for alleged verification.

vi. That as per report the Expert has reported that 140610_003 & 140612_003 were not having sufficient data to verify.

CC No. 01/15 Page No. 121 of 212

CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 vii. That as per report Ex.PW10/A the files 140610_002 (Q1(1)), 140610_00 (Q1(3)) AND 140612_003 (Q2(1)) & 140612_004 (Q2(2)) recordings are not started as reported in the Report Ex.PW10/A, which is clear from the evidence when the alleged Memory Card was played. In the report, it was reported that the said voice was reported to be of accused Fakir Chand. Hence the report is totally relied upon the details supplied by the IO.

viii. That as per report the files in the memory cards were as under:

140610_001, 140610_002 etc. & 140612_001 & 140612_002 etc. without any extension of file.

Whereas when the memory cards were opened in the Court, the sound files were as under

140610_001.MP3, 140610_002.MP3 etc. and 140612_001.MP3 & 140612_002.MP3 etc. Hence, there was extension of files with MP3, hence the same shows manipulation.

ix. That the Memory Card S1 as per report is having MSGLIST.MSF.File but the same were not found when CC No. 01/15 Page No. 122 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 the Memory Card S1 was open in the court.

x. That as per the system of alleged DVR in which the recordings were allegedly recorded in Memory Card, the system of creating File were as under: 140610_001 means year (2014 as 14), month (06) date (10) and file name _001.

The same was of 12th June 14 recording as 140612_001 Whereas in the recording of alleged sample voice of accused (which was not recorded with permission of the court) the file system is different as the same is shown as 110613__001 etc. which should be 140613_001 etc. xi. That the voice recording file 140612_003, as played in the court, is starts from ring tone of phone Whereas as per Transcription there was no such ring tone in starting of said file.

Similarly the voice recording file 140612_004, as played in the court, starts from sound of traffic before starting of conversation, whereas in the report/Transcript there is no such sound, hence the CC No. 01/15 Page No. 123 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 alleged recording can not be relied upon and not admissible in the eyes of law.

xii. That as per PW7 the specimen voice of the accused was recorded in the Mobile on 13.06.2014, whereas as per CBI officers the alleged specimen voice was recorded in DVR.

xiii. That as per statement of PW1 he was directed by the accused to go to nearby school to Mark on line attendance and to send some document, but the same is neither in recording nor in Transcript.

xiv. That as per the Transcript in some of the sentence, the voice is not clear, whereas as per report the said voice was clear. Even the words in Report and Transcript are different at various places.

xv. That as per law laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court as well as Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in various cases including the case titled as:

Anil Kumar Titu @ Anil Kumar Sharma Versus State of NCT Delhi, Crl.A. 66/13 decided by Hon'ble High Court of Delhi on 29/05/2015 thereby pleased to rely CC No. 01/15 Page No. 124 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 upon all the leading judgments including in Ram Singh and Ors. v. Col. Ram Singh, 1985 (Supp) SCC 611, it held that some of the conditions necessary for admissibility of tape recorded statements, as follows:

"(1) The voice of the speaker must be duly identified by the maker of the record or by others who recognise his voice. In other words, it manifestly follows as a logical corollary that the first condition for the admissibility of such a statement is to identify the voice of the speaker.

Where the voice has been denied by the maker it will require very strict proof to determine whether or not it was really the voice of the speaker.

(2) The accuracy of the taperecorded statement has to be proved by the maker of the record by satisfactory evidence direct or circumstantial.

(3) Every possibility of tampering with or erasure of a part of a taperecorded statement must be ruled out otherwise it may render the said statement out of context and, therefore, inadmissible.

(4) The statement must be relevant according to the rules of Evidence Act.

(5) The recorded cassette must be carefully sealed and kept in safe or official custody.

(6) The voice of the speaker should be clearly audible and not lost or distorted by other sounds or disturbances."

266. Ld. counsel for the accused has also relied upon the judgment titled as Mahabir Prasad Verma v. Dr. Surinder Kaur, (1982) 2 SCC 258, this Court has laid down that tape recorded evidence can only be used as corroboration evidence in paragraph 22, it is observed as follows:

CC No. 01/15 Page No. 125 of 212

CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 "22. ......Taperecorded conversation can only be relied upon as corroborative evidence of conversation deposed by any of the parties to the conversation and in the absence of evidence of any such conversation, the taperecorded conversation is indeed no proper evidence and cannot be relied upon. In the instant case, there was no evidence of any such conversation between the tenant and the husband of the landlady; and in the absence of any such conversation, the taperecorded conversation could be no proper evidence."

267. It is further contended by Ld. counsel for the accused that under the facts and circumstances, it is crystal clear that the alleged voice recording either of 10.06.2014 or 12.06.2014 in the present case is not admissible in the eyes of law and is not admissible in the evidence, as these are neither authenticated nor tempered proof.

268. It is further contended by Ld. counsel for the accused that in the present case the time of alleged raid and alleged apprehension of the accused is very relevant, the relevant time as per prosecution story are as under:

a. The complainant, shadow witness, independent witness and other members of raiding team have reached at the office of CBI on 12.06.2014 at about 6.006.30 a.m. before registration of the FIR and without any schedule of the alleged raid.

b. The complainant as well as other witnesses have CC No. 01/15 Page No. 126 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 specifically deposed that as and when the complainant reached in CBI office, all the witnesses and member of team were already present whereas as per witnesses when they reached, the complainant was present there,, hence the same can not be relied upon.

c. That as per call record there is a call from the complainant to the accused's mobile at about 5.58 a.m. in morning on 12.06.2014. Neither the complainant nor the prosecution/CBI has explained about the said call.

d. That as per the CDR, the complainant has allegedly called the CBI official at about 9.36 a.m. on 12.06.2014 thereby informing about the alleged receipt of amount from the complainant. Hence as per story of prosecution the time of the alleged raid should be around 9.36 a.m. Whereas as per statements of the witnesses the time of alleged raid/incident is as under :

As per alleged Recovery Memo CBI officer reached near the School at 9.30 a.m. and stopped the Vehicle about 1.001.5 Km. before the School in question.

CC No. 01/15 Page No. 127 of 212

CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 PW1 (Complainant): as per PW1, he reached at school along with raiding team at 9.30 a.m. and then he entered in the school followed by Shri Sunil Thapliyal on feet and thereafter he talked with staff, principal and other and after 1520 minutes he called the CBI officials i.e. after 9.459.50 a.m. PW5 (Sunil Thapliyal) Shadow Witness: As per this witness it was already 10.30 a.m. on the way to school from CBI office.

The call from complainant about receipt of amount was received after 5 minutes of his (PW5) coming out from School after meeting the accused/Principal, hence as per this witness the time of raid was at about 10.50 or thereafter.

PW6 Dharambir (Independent Witness): As per this witness they reached at the School at 9.30 a.m. and Shadow Witness went inside School after 1520 Minutes. It is admitted case of the prosecution that the complainant has called the CBI officer only thereafter, hence as per this witness also the call/raid should be at about 10.000 a.m. on 12.06.2014.

PW8 Insp. Arjun Kumar Mourya: This witness CC No. 01/15 Page No. 128 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 specifically deposed that "we reached at School at 10.00 a.m. and after about half an hour the team entered in the School." Hence as per this witness the time of alleged Raid was about 10.30 a.m. PW9 Ins.Ramesh Kumar, TLO: This witness also deposed that they reached to School at 10.00 a.m. and inside School at 10.1010.15 a.m.

269. It is contended that hence as per this witness the time of alleged raid was 10.1010.15 a.m.

270. It is further contended by Ld. counsel for the accused that the prosecution has even failed to prove the time of alleged raid and alleged recovery. Hence the story of the prosecution regarding alleged demand and recovery can not be relied upon and the prosecution has miserably failed to prove the case against the accused.

271. It is further contended by Ld. counsel for the accused that as per alleged recovery memo the time of alleged raid, documents and evidence the alleged recovery is doubtful.

272. It is further contended by Ld. counsel for the accused that the prosecution has failed to prove as to how CC No. 01/15 Page No. 129 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 and in what manner the right hand wash of the accused turned to pink colour whereas As per entire evidence, none of the witness has alleged that the accused has used his right hand in any manner. It is further contended that the complainant PW1 has specifically deposed that he (accused) hold amount in left hand and immediately kept the same in Pocket. None of the witness, except complainant, has deposed or proved that the accused has ever demanded any amount or received any amount in their presence from the complainant. It is further contended that the prosecution has failed to prove that the accused has received any bribe amount and the alleged recovery is planted upon him.

273. It is further contended by Ld. counsel for the accused that without admitting the allegations leveled by the prosecution, it is submitted that it is well settled law that mere recovery, if any, is not sufficient for convicting the accused under section 7/13 (1) (d) & 13 (2) PC Act.

274. It is further contended by Ld. counsel for the accused that the complainant deposed that he reached in the office of CBI at 7.00 a.m. with GC Notes (but he failed to prove that who called him on that day and how the alleged raid was scheduled); deposed that he left the CBI office on 12.06.2014 at 7.30 a.m. by his own car along with shadow CC No. 01/15 Page No. 130 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 and independent witnesses and Ins. Arjun Kumar Mourya for School; the complainant deposed that the accused hold the amount in his left hand and immediately kept the same in Pocket. (Hence there was no occasion to show positive test of phenolphthalein in right hand wash, which shows that the CBI has manipulated the Hand Washes to falsely implicate the accused in the present case); the complainant deposed that he again went to CBI office on 17.07.2014 (but failed to prove that who called him on that day in the CBI office and even the witnesses were also present there on that day).

275. It is further contended by Ld. counsel for the accused that in his crossexamination, the complainant has admitted that he never lodged any complaint against the accused to the School or Education Department but he deposed that he lodged the complaint to his office (Whereas no such complaint was lodged or proved on record.); he has deposed that sending the attendance certificate was his job as well as his nature of job was to send the attendance of all staff; he has deposed that the company used to impose penalty of Rs.100/ per day for delay in submitting the attendance certificate (Whereas as per other witness from company there was no such provision of imposing penalty nor ever imposed upon him nor there was any documentary CC No. 01/15 Page No. 131 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 evidence in this regard, hence it is clear that this witness was having malafide intention and motive to implicate the accused in the false case); he has admitted that his father was in CBI. He has also admitted that he asked the accused to issue the experience certificate but the accused refused for the same; he has further deposed that he used to mark his attendance with time in attendance certificate and did not mark his attendance on the day of his absence. (Whereas as per attendance register the complainant was present in school on 10.06.2014 and 11.06.2014 from 8.00 a.m. to 2.00 p.m.);

he has further deposed that he marked his attendance and time on 12.06.2014. (As per attendance register he was present in school from 8.00 a.m. on 12.06.2014); he has admitted that the attendance certificate for the month of June 2014 was issued by Vice Principal only on 21.07.2014; he deposed that he reached in the CBI office at 6.15 a.m. on 12.06.2014 and both witnesses, Ins. A.K. Mauria and others were already present there; he has deposed that he reached at School at about 9.30 a.m. and the vehicles were stopped about one and one half K.m. prior to School and DVR was put in his pocket in "on" position. He has also deposed that he entered in the School alone; he has further deposed that the Principal took him to his room and thereafter they came out and accused sat on the cot in open courtyard. (whereas as per CC No. 01/15 Page No. 132 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 other witnesses, the accused was sitting at cot and has not changed his position till his apprehension); he also deposed that he reached in the School at 9.00 a.m. (Whereas as per story of prosecution they reached at 9.30 a.m.); he has further deposed that the other staff of School was called by CBI officers after apprehension of the accused; he has also deposed that DVR were seized on 10/06 and 12.06.2014. (Whereas as per prosecution no DVR was Seized); he has deposed that on 17.07.2014, the transcript was dictated directly on computer. (whereas as per statement of other witness PW5 he wrote the Transcript).

276. It is further contended by Ld. counsel for the accused that the PW3 has deposed that he examined the parcels on 03.07.2014 and the report was prepared by his staff and he signed the same. Hence the alleged report is not proved as per law.

277. It is further contended by Ld. counsel for the accused that PW5 Sunil Thapliyal has deposed that the complainant told that the accused will not talk in his presence; he has deposed that he reached to CBI office on 10.06.2014 at 10.00 a.m. and remained with Duty officer upto 3.004.00 p.m. on that day. (Hence it is clear that he has not joined the alleged verification of complaint by visiting the CC No. 01/15 Page No. 133 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 residence of accused, as alleged by prosecution.); he has deposed that the Insp. A.K. Mouria has directed him and complainant to come on 12.06.2014 at 6.30 a.m. (Whereas on that day neither the case was registered nor marked to him nor he or any other witness supported this fact of calling on 12.06.2014 by him); he has deposed that he reached to CBI office on 12.06.2014 at 6.30 a.m. and complainant and witnesses were already present there; he has further deposed that it was already 10.30 a.m. on the way on 12.06.2014; he has further deposed that complainant entered in the school and he followed him. Principal was in a meeting and thereafter he came out and sat on a cot; he has further deposed that he was called to CBI office after about a month or quarter to month for identification Memo; he has deposed that he signed his statement under section 161 Cr.P.C. (there is no such statement on record); he has deposed that no conversation took place between accused and complainant in his presence (Hence he was neither the witness of alleged demand nor of handing over any amount to the accused, as alleged by prosecution); he has further deposed that First Hand Wash were taken then the staff was called. (Whereas as per Recovery Memo the Insp. G. S. Meena arranged water for hand wash, as per witness Om prakash his Peon has arranged water and as per this witness the staff of school was called CC No. 01/15 Page No. 134 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 after hand washes, hence the story of the prosecution is not reliable); he has deposed that after the recovery of GC Notes the number of GC Notes were again recorded by CBI officer. (whereas none of witness has stated so nor the numbers of GC Notes were recorded again); he has also deposed that he wrote the Transcript.

278. It is further contended by Ld. counsel for the accused that PW6 Dharambir is alleged independent witness in the present case. He has deposed that on 12.06.2014 he reached to School at 9.30 a.m. and Sunil Thapliyal entered in the school after 1520 minutes of the complainant; he has deposed that he received a letter on 11.06.2014 from his higher officials to go to CBI office on 12.06.2014. (Whereas on 11.06.2014 neither the case was registered nor any raid was planned then how the CBI officers have called him in advance for the present case.); he has deposed that he reached in office of CBI on 12.06.2014 at 6.306.45 at Reception and pretrap proceedings took 2025 minutes; he has deposed that no demand was ever made by accused in his presence; he has deposed that the complainant and Sunil Thapliyal entered together in the School; he has further deposed that he went to CBI office only on one day i.e. 12.06.2014.

CC No. 01/15 Page No. 135 of 212

CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017

279. It is further contended by Ld. counsel for the accused that PW8 Insp. Arjun Kumar Maurya deposed that he submitted the Verification Report on 11.06.2014 to the SP, CBI, ACB, Delhi; he has deposed that he came to know about registration of the case on 12.06.2014; he has deposed that on 10.06.2014 he directed the complainant to attend the office of CBI as and when he required and he will call him (complainant). (Whereas it is admitted case that he never called the complainant and witness to come on 12.06.2014); he has deposed that he reached to School on 12.06.2014 along with complainant and shadow witness at 10.00 a.m. and after half an hour they entered in the School. (Whereas as per prosecution story and alleged recovery memo etc. the CBI officers along with complainant and witnesses had reached at 9.30 a.m. to the School).

280. It is further contended by Ld. counsel for the accused that PW9 Insp. Ramesh Kumar was TLO and the case was marked to him by the SP CBI for alleged raid; he has deposed that he reached to the CBI office on 12.06.2014 at 5.45 a.m. and complainant came at 6.45 a.m.. He has also deposed that they reached near school at 9.30 a.m.; he has deposed that DVR was got allotted by A.K. Mauria (Whereas Shri A.K. Mauria never deposed the same); he has deposed CC No. 01/15 Page No. 136 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 that the accused has signed the recovery memo in different style as told by complainant (whereas none of the witness or complainant deposed the same); he has deposed that he does not know who called the witnesses; he has admitted that log book of vehicles were maintained but the same was not taken on record, which throw grave doubt on the story of prosecution. It is further contended that in his cross examination he deposed that he reached to school at 10.00 a.m. and staff of school was present there and they entered in the school at 10.10 a.m.; he has deposed that the demand of bribe was to get complete the pending attendance. (Whereas as per prosecution story the demand was for issuance of Attendance Certificate. Even otherwise the complainant has not deposed that any bribe was demanded for completion of any pending attendance).

281. It is further contended by Ld. counsel for the accused that PW10 Sh. Deepak Kumar Tanwar specifically deposed that he used to mention each and every thing about the parcel (Hence as per report the Memory cards were in envelope not in Plastic Cover), hence, the chance of tempering cannot be ruled out in the present case; he has deposed that he has received the parcels along with transcript on 24.06.2014 (whereas the transcript as per prosecution was CC No. 01/15 Page No. 137 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 prepared on 17.07.2014, hence the story of the prosecution about the alleged recording is full of clouds of doubt).

282. It is further contended by Ld. counsel for the accused that PW11 Sh. Rajiv Rathi has falsify the entire complaint and story of the complainant as well as deposed that there was no provision of imposing penalty for non submission of the attendance certificate and he specifically deposed that they used to release the salary of their employee including complainant as and when they received from Education department.

283. It is further contended by Ld. counsel for the accused that PW14 Sh. Om Prakash is neither witness of demand nor of payment of any amount. He is witness of alleged recovery. (However in the Recovery memo in the list of present persons his name is not appearing, although his signatures were allegedly taken on the said memo).

284. It is further contended by Ld. counsel for the accused that DW1 has proved that the accused has already lodged the complaint against complainant regarding his threat to falsely implicate in the case as his father was in CBI.

285. It is further contended by Ld. counsel for the accused that neither the FSL expert nor the CBI official have CC No. 01/15 Page No. 138 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 issued certificate under section 65B of Indian Evidence Act in respect of the CDs prepared from the alleged Memory Card or the Transcript prepared through Computer/laptop, hence the same is not admissible in the eyes of law.

286. It is further contended by Ld. counsel for the accused that the prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond doubt and even from the record, it is crystal clear that the alleged verification was never carried out nor the alleged raiding team has acted in proper and fair manner. The prosecution failed to prove as to how the right hand wash of the accused given positive result despite the fact that the said hand was never used to take the alleged GC Notes. There was no occasion for the accused to demand the alleged bribe as well as there was no reasonable ground for paying any such alleged bribe more so when the contract of the complainant has already comes to an end and the previous attendance certificates have already been issued by the accused. The alleged complainant himself was an offender, if the story of the prosecution relied upon.

287. It is further contended by Ld. counsel for the accused that the prosecution has failed to prove that there was any demand or recovery of alleged GC Notes and also failed to connect the accused with the alleged offences, hence CC No. 01/15 Page No. 139 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 he is entitled to be acquitted.

288. In support of his contentions, Ld. counsel for the accused has relied upon the following judgments :

              a.             Anil   Kumar   Titu   @   Anil   Kumar   Sharma  
                             Versus   State   of   NCT   Delhi,   Crl.A.   66/13  
                             decided   by   Hon'ble   High   Court   of   Delhi   on  
                             29/05/2015

              b.             Selvaraj   Vs.   State   of   Karnataka,   Cr.A.   No.
                             1172 of 2008 (Supreme Court)

              c.             State   Through   CBI   Vs.   Shobha   Chhabra,  
                             Crl.A.   573/2004   Decided   on   10/12/2015,  
                             Delhi High Court

              d.             Ashish Kumar Dubey Vs. State Through CBI,  
                             2014 (142) DRJ 396

              e.             Suraj Mal Vs. State (Delhi Admn.), 1980 SCC  
                             (Crl) 159

              f.             Niranjan Singh Vs. CBI, 2013 (4) Crime 12

              g.             Subhash Chand Chauhan Vs. CBI, 2005 (3)  
                             AD 41
               
              h.             A. Shivaprakash Vs. State of Kerala, Cr.A. No.  
                             131/2007 (SC)

              i.             C.M. GirishBabu Vs. CBI, 2009 AIR (SC) 2022

              j.             P. Satyanarayana Murthy Vs. The Dist. Inspr.  


CC No. 01/15                                                                                                Page No. 140 of 212
 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma                                Judgment                           Dated : 19.09.2017


                             Of Police & Others, Cr. A. No. 31/2009 (SC)

              k.             R.P. S. Yadav Vs. CBI, 2015 (1) Crime 286

              l.             S. K. Saini & Ors. Vs. CBI, 2015 (3) JCC 2169

              m.             Prem   Singh  Yadav Vs.  CBI,  2011  (3)  Crime  
                             426

              n.             C. Sukumaran Vs. State of Kerala, 2015 AIR  
                             (SCW) 951

              o.             Sudhir   Chaudhary   &   Ors   Vs.   State,   NCT   of  
                             Delhi, 2016 AIR (SC) 3772

289. According to the case of CBI, accused Fakir Chand Sharma has been chargesheeted for the offence under Section 7 and 13 (2) r/w Section 13 (1) (d) of Prevention of Corruption Act 1988.

290. The allegations are that accused Fakir Chand Sharma while posted as Principal of Government Coed, Senior Secondary School, Kangan Heri, New Delhi, being public servant, on 10/06/2014 by corrupt or illegal means, abused/ misused his official position demanded/ agreed to obtain illegal gratification to the tune of Rs.10,000/ from complainant Sh. Amit Kumar, with a motive/ reward for sign his attendance and then on 12/06/2014 he was caught red handed by the CBI while accepting the illegal gratification of CC No. 01/15 Page No. 141 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 Rs 10,000/ from the complainant outside of Government Co ed, Senior Secondary School, Kangan Heri, New Delhi.

291. Complainant in this case is PW1 Sh. Amit Kumar. According to the complainant/PW1, he was working as IT Assistant in Govt. CoEducation Sr. Secondary School, Kanganheri New Delhi from July 2012 to 30 th June 2014. At that time, accused Fakir Chand Sharma was working as Principal in the said school. Complainant had identified the accused Fakir Chand Sharma correctly before the court.

292. PW1 has further deposed that he was working on contract basis through M/s Computer Clinic India Pvt. Ltd. According to the terms and conditions of the agreement, his attendance had to be sent by the school to said company for release of his monthly salary, so in this respect he used to go to meet Principal/ accused Fakir Chand Sharma and used to ask him to send his attendance to his company M/s Computer Clinic India Pvt Ltd for release of his salary on 2nd day of each English Calender month but accused Fakir Chand Sharma had demanded money from him for sending his attendance.

293. PW1 had further deposed that when in June, 2014, he had gone to the office of accused Fakir Chand Sharma, being Principal of the said school for sending his CC No. 01/15 Page No. 142 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 attendance, accused told him that he was not benefited in any manner with the complainant, as he used to work only for two hours and raised demand of Rs.10,000/ from him. The salary of the complainant was Rs.10,400/ only at that time. Thereafter, on 10/06/2014, he went to the CBI office to make complaint against accused Fakir Chand Sharma for demand of Rs.10,000/ from him.

294. PW1 has further deposed that he gave his written complaint to CBI. To verify the truthfulness of the same, SI Arjun Kumar Maurya was appointed. On the same day he alongwith CBI SI Arjun Kumar Maurya and one more independent witness Sunil Thapliyal had gone to the residence of accused Fakir Chand Sharma. He left the CBI office alongwith independent witness and CBI Inspector at about 12.15 p.m on 10/06/2014 and before leaving CBI office, he made a call to accused Fakir Chand Sharma and accused Fakir Chand Sharma assured him that he will meet him at his residence after about one hour.

295. PW1 has further deposed that they reached Najafgarh in the vehicle of CBI at about 1.30 p.m. PW1 again made a call to accused Fakir Chand Sharma to confirm as to whether he had reached at his house or not. Accused confirmed that he had reached at his house and was available CC No. 01/15 Page No. 143 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 there and this conversation was also recorded by the CBI. Thereafter, DVR was put in his pocket by CBI Inspector Arjun Kumar Maurya and he was directed to go with Independent witness Sunil Thapliyal to the house of Fakir Chand Sharma. They reached there. Accused Fakir Chand Sharma opened the main door of his house and he along with independent witness Sunil Thapliyal entered in the house of accused. There conversation had taken place regarding other staff of the school between him and the accused Fakir Chand Sharma and accused Fakir Chand Sharma handed over the attendance sheet after signing the same to him. At the time of handing over of the attendance sheet to complainant, accused Fakir Chand Sharma had told him that he will recommend his name to his company for the further period as the contract has to be expired and at that time accused Fakir Chand Sharma raised demand of Rs.10,000/ from him for signing of his attendance sheet. After discussion, he agreed to arrange Rs.10,000/ for him within one or two days and accused Fakir Chand Sharma allowed. Thereafter, he came out from the house of accused Fakir Chand Sharma and after some distance independent witness Sunil Thapliyala also met him and then both of them came at the CBI vehicle where SI Arjun Kr Maurya had collected the voice recorder from him and immediately switched it off. Thereafter, they left CC No. 01/15 Page No. 144 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 Najafgarh for CBI office at about 2 p.m and reached the CBI office at about 3 or 3.15 p.m.

296. According to the transcription of the said conversation recorded in the house of accused Fakir Chand Chand Sharma taken place between the complainant and accused, accused Fakir Chand Sharma had demanded the bribe of Rs 10,000/ for attendance for the months of May and June and he had given reason for the same that the complainant was not coming it could be informed to his company and then Rs 500/ per day will be deducted. Accused Fakir Chand Sharma also told that complainant may come once in a week and after finishing his work, he could leave.

297. According to PW5, independent witness Sh. Sunil Thapliyal in June 2014, he was working as Computer Programmer, Delhi Tourism & Development Corporation Ltd., Defence Colony, New Delhi and had attended the office of CBI on 10/06/2014, on the directions given by his Chief Manager (Personnel). Accordingly, he visited CBI office and met with SI A.K. Maurya, who introduced him with Sh. Amit Kumar, who lodged a complaint regarding demand of illegal gratification of Rs.10,000/ by accused Fakir Chand Sharma, Principal of Govt. CoEduction Sr. Secondary School, Village CC No. 01/15 Page No. 145 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 Kanganheri, New Delhi. He had also gone through the complaint. In order to verify the complaint, a DVR was arranged by SI A.K. Maurya and an external memory card was inserted in it and after ensuring that it does not contain any prerecorded conversation, his introductory voice was recorded in the memory card. Thereafter, a call was made to accused Fakir Chand Sharma from the mobile of complainant Sh. Amit Kumar. It was informed by accused Fakir Chand Sharma that he was coming to his residence and asked the complainant to reach at his residence. This call was also recorded in the DVR by keeping the mobile on the speaker mode.

298. PW5 has further deposed that he alongwith Inspector A.K. Maurya, complainant Sh. Amit Kumar went to Najafgarh in an official vehicle. On reaching there, complainant Sh. Amit Kumar told that accused Fakir Chand Sharma will not talk with him in presence of someone. So, it was decided to put the DVR in the pocket of complainant Sh. Amit Kumar after keeping switch it on. Complainant Sh. Amit Kumar entered into the residence of accused Fakir Chand Sharma. After 15 to 20 minutes, complainant Sh. Amit Kumar came back from the residence of accused Fakir Chand Sharma. SI A.K.Maurya took back the DVR from the CC No. 01/15 Page No. 146 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 complainant and switched it off. Thereafter, they left the residence of accused Fakir Chand Sharma and came back to the office of CBI. The recorded conversation in the DVR was heard with the help of laptop, which confirmed the demand of illegal gratification of Rs.10,000/ on the part of Principal, Fakir Chand Sharma. Thereafter, the memory card was taken out from the DVR and it was sealed with the seal of CBI and the seal after use was handed over to him for its safe custody. Thereafter some documents were prepared.

299. PW5 has identified the verification report Ex PW1/B which bears his signatures.

300. PW5 has further deposed that he and complainant were directed by SI A.K Maurya to attend the CBI office on 12/06/2014 at about 6.30 am.

301. PW3 Inspector Arjun Kumar Maurya has stated that on 10/06/2014, he was called by his S.P, Sh. D.K. Barik and was introduced to Sh. Amit Kumar, who had some complaint against a Government official and he directed the complainant to go with him for the purpose of verification of the complaint. He made enquiry from the complainant. There were allegations of demand of illegal gratification. He directed the complainant to give the complaint in writing.

CC No. 01/15 Page No. 147 of 212

CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 Complainant wrote a complaint and handed over the same to him. He produced the said complaint to his S.P. Sh. DK Barik which was marked to him for verification. PW8 has proved the complaint Ex PW1/A. He has identified the signatures of Sh. D.K Barik on the complaint at point C. To verify the complaint, he arranged one independent witness Sh. Sunil Thapliyal and also arranged a digital voice recorder make Sony and sealed 4 GB micro SD memory card. Thereafter, he introduced the complainant Amit Kumar with independent witness Sh. Sunil Thapliyal. He had also showed the written complaint to Sh. Sunil Thapliyal and after going through the same, Sh Sunil Thapliyal made some enquiries from the complainant to satisfy himself. Thereafter, the introductory voice of witness Sh Sunil Thapliyal was recorded in the micro SD Card through DVR. Then a call from the mobile of the complainant to the mobile of accused Fakir Chand Sharma was made and the said conversations were recorded in the said DVR. In this conversation, accused Fakir Chand Sharma directed the complainant to come at his residence. He further informed that at that point of time, he was not at his residence and he would reach at home within one and half hour. So, he along with complainant, independent witness Sunil Thapliyal left for the residence of accused Fakir Chand Sharma in a government vehicle at about 12.15 hours and CC No. 01/15 Page No. 148 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 reached near the residence of accused Fakir Chand Sharma at about 1.30 p.m. On reaching there, he again confirmed whether accused Fakir Chand Sharma reached at his residence or not. Again, a call was made from the mobile of the complainant to the mobile of accused Fakir Chand Sharma. This conversation was also recorded in the said DVR by keeping the mobile phone on speaker mode. In this conversation, accused Fakir Chand Sharma had informed that he was reaching at his home within 5 minutes. Thereafter, he briefed the independent witness to go along with the complainant. At this point, the complainant informed that accused Fakir Chand Sharma will not make any demand in the presence of any third person, so he directed the independent witness to accompany the complainant upto the gate of the house of accused Fakir Chand Sharma so, that he could identify accused Fakir Chand Sharma while opening the gate of the house and also to read the name plate, if any affixed on the gate of the house.

302. PW8 has further deposed that thereafter, he switched on the DVR and put the same in the recording mode and switch on the key hold key so that any other key will not function. Then he handed over the said DVR to the complainant and then both of them to go to the residence of CC No. 01/15 Page No. 149 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 accused Fakir Chand Sharma. Accordingly, they reached there and he himself remained in the vehicle.

303. PW8 has further deposed that after half an hour the complainant and the independent witness came back to the vehicle. The DVR was taken back by him and switched off. Thereafter, he asked the independent witness Sunil Thapliyal about his position to which independent witness answered that he was standing at the gate of the house of accused Fakir Chand Sharma and when the door was opened, he saw a person aged about 50 years, had opened the door. Thereafter, they came back to the CBI office at about 04.00 p.m. There recorded conversations were heard, which established the demand of bribe of Rs.10,000/ from the complainant by accused Fakir Chand Sharma for signing the attendance sheet.

304. PW8 has further deposed that thereafter, he prepared a copy of the recorded conversation by using his official laptop for the purpose of investigation and the micro SD card was taken out from the DVR. It was signed by all of them and was sealed by using CBI seal and the envelope was also signed by all of them. The seal after use was handed over to independent witness Sh Sunil Thapliyal with the direction to produce it in the court as and when asked by the court.

CC No. 01/15 Page No. 150 of 212

CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 Thereafter, he prepared a verification memo which is Ex PW1/B and bears his signatures.

305. All these three witnesses i.e., PW1, PW3 and PW8 have identified the yellow colour envelope, khakhi envelope and miscro SD card. It is stated that proceedings were completed by him at about 6.30 p.m, so he gave the report to his SP Sh. DK Barik on the next day i.e. on 11.06.2014.

306. PW1 Sh. Amit Kumar has also identified his voice and voice of accused Fakir Chand Sharma of the recorded conversation in the DVR, while playing the same on the laptop before the court and has also confirmed the transcription of the same, which was prepared after hearing the said conversation.

307. At the outset, ld. Counsel for the accused has contended that the accused has been falsely implicated in this case as before registration of this case, accused had given a complaint to Dy. Director, Education, Distt. South WestB, Najafgarh, New Delhi, disclosing that complainant threatened him to falsely implicated in the CBI case as his father was working in CBI.

308. According to the attendance register maintained in the school Ex PW1/DX1, the complainant was present in CC No. 01/15 Page No. 151 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 the school and was on duty on 10th, 11th and 12th from 8 am to 2 pm and he had signed in the register, which shows that complainant could not present in the CBI office on 10/06/2017 nor he could have gone with the CBI officer and independent witness to the house of accused Fakir Chand on that day. It is further contended that house of accused Fakir Chand Sharma is situated in Najafgarh, whereas the school of accused Fakir Chand Sharma is at Kanganheri and according to deposition of PW1 he had gone to the office of CBI and left the CBI office at about 12.15pm. They reached at Najafgarh at about 1.30 pm and thereafter they came back to the CBI office at about 3 or 3.15 pm. So most of the time, he remained with CBI Inspector and independent witness, so his testimony cannot be relied upon.

309. It is further contended that according to PW1/DX (colly), the attendance report of the complainant for the period June 2014 has been signed by Sh. Om Prakash, Vice Principal, Government Co Ed. Senior Secondary School, Kangan Heri on 26/06/2014, whereas the attendance report of the complainant of May 2014 is signed by accused but it does not bear any date. Attendance report of April 2014 was signed on 05/05/2014, of March 2014 was signed on 01/04/2014 and of February 2014 was signed on CC No. 01/15 Page No. 152 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 01/03/2014 and of January was signed on 31/01/2014, so there was no reason for accused to demand any bribe from the complainant, when already the attendance reports were being signed by accused Fakir Chand Sharma in time and were being handed over to the complainant.

310. It is further contended that according to the conversation, accused Fakir Chand Sharma demanded bribe of Rs 10,000/ from complainant on account of signing of his attendance of May and June 2014, so there was no motive for the accused to ask the bribe from the complainant for singing of his attendance of May and June 2014 as the attendance of May had already been given.

311. In the cross examination, PW1 has stated that accused Fakir Chand Sharma used to delay his attendance sheet for sending to his company, due to which the company used to deduct his salary. In further cross examination, PW1 has further stated that the company used to deduct his salary from the total amount for per day. Besides the deduction of the salary for the leave period, company used to deduct Rs.100/ per day as penalty. If we calculated the salary for 25 working days then it came to Rs 400/ + Rs 100/ as penalty, the total came to Rs 500/ and it seems that complainant used to remain absent from the duty and he wanted false CC No. 01/15 Page No. 153 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 attendance certificate from the accused Fakir Chand Shrma, showing his full attendance for which demand was raised. The attendance reports from January 2014 to June 2014. Ex.PW1/DX (colly) clearly shows that in February 2014, complainant was absent for one day, in March 2014 complainant was absent for four days and in June 2014, he was absent for four days. Not only this, complainant used to come to the school only for 2 hours, however his duty hours were from 08:00 AM to 02:00 PM, as appearing in conversation of 10.06.2014. The fact that the complainant wanted to get done the favour from the accused has been concealed by the complainant in the complaint and also from the CBI, otherwise there was no motive for the accused Fakir Chand Sharma to demand bribe/illegal gratification only for signing of the attendance report, if he could not provide any benefit to the accused. It appears in the initial conversation that at the time of demand, accused wanted to save penalties, which could be imposed of Rs 500/ per day upon the complainant and even he did not attend the school on some dates as appeared in the said conversation and it was also agreed that complainant was going to allow to visit the school only for one day, so on account of all these benefits, which were being facilitated to the complainant, demand of bribe of Rs.10,000/ was raised.

CC No. 01/15 Page No. 154 of 212

CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017

312. It is further contended by ld. Counsel for accused that PW1 has admitted in the cross examination that he did not go to the school on 10/06/2014 and had gone to the CBI office. He has further stated that he did not go to the school on 11/06/2014 but had gone to his company and on 12/06/2014 he had gone to the school only at about 9.30 am. He had marked his attendance on 12/06/2014 in the school attendance register and also mentioned the time. It is further contended that this deposition of the complainant is totally contradictory to the attendance as appearing in Ex PW1/DX1, according to which on 10/06/2014, 11/06/2014 and on 12/06/2014, complainant had marked his attendance at 9.30 am about his arrival and marked his attendance at 2 pm about his departure only for 10/06/2014 and 11/06/2014 and he had signed his departure time from the school on 12/06/2014, which itself shows the conduct of the complainant and it is doubtful that on 10.06.2014 and 12.06.2014, he was with CBI.

313. In further cross examination, PW1 has stated that as per the direction of the accused, he marked the attendance time as 08:00 a.m. H did not disclose this fact to the CBI officials as well as to this court. He has denied the suggestion in this respect and also denied that he was present in the CC No. 01/15 Page No. 155 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 school on that day at about 8 am.

314. It is further contended on behalf of accused that according to the deposition of PW1 on 10/06/2014 while he was present in the house of accused, accused had handed over to him his attendance sheet after signing the same. So at the most this could be the attendance sheet of May 2014 which is without any date because the attendance report of June 2014 has been signed by Vice Principal on 21/07/2014.

315. It is contended that according to the depositions of witnesses, particularly of PW8, after the verification, the team came to the CBI office at about 3 or 3.15 pm and proceedings were concluded till 6.30 pm, so the report was produced before the then SP D.K Barik on the next day i.e., 11/06/2016, which shows that complainant Amit Kumar remained with CBI officials till the evening, so in all possibilities he could not deposit the attendance sheet of May 2014 to the company on 10/06/2014. Even complainant has not produced the attendance sheet received by him as stated to the CBI officer and the explanation given is that he had deposited the same with his company which seems to be false as till late evening complainant was present with the CBI officials, so it is also doubtful whether any such attendance CC No. 01/15 Page No. 156 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 certificate of May 2014 was signed and was given by the accused to the complainant on 10/06/2014 and complainant had gone to house of accused cannot be relied upon in any manner.

316. PW5 could not entered the house of accused as complainant had stated that the accused will not make any demand in presence of third person, so could not hear any conversation but later on he has prepared the transcription of the conversation. PW5 remained outside the house of the accused, so effectively he is not the witness to the demand in any manner.

317. Ld. Counsel for the accused contended that according to the cross examination of PW5, he reached at the CBI office on 10.06.2014 at 10.00 AM and remained with the Duty Officer upto 3.00 4.00 PM, thereafter, he was called by the CBI official by Sh. Arjun Kumar Maurya on the same day and meeting was arranged with the complainant which itself shows that he had not gone to the house of accused with the complainant and IO SI Arjun Kumar Maurya and merely was present in the CBI office. It seems that his signatures were obtained later on on the verification report because the CBI officials had come back to the office at about 3 or 3.15 pm whereas this witness Sh. Sunil Thapliyal remained present CC No. 01/15 Page No. 157 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 with the duty officer upto 34 pm in the office of CBI which shows that he had not accompanied the complainant and IO SI Arjun Kumar Maurya.

318. The voice recording, which has been taken place between the complainant and the accused which was recorded through DVR, has been analyzed by PW10 Sh. Deepak Kumar Tanwar, Senior Scientific Officer GradeI (Physics), CFSL, CBI, New Delhi. He has deposed about his vast experience in the field of voice examination. According to his deposition, in their office three sealed parcels with specimen seal impression and transcript of recorded conversation were received. The parcel mark Q1 was found containing memory card Q1 of make Kingston of 4GB capacity. The card was found containing three recorded conversations of respective duration 33 seconds, 15 seconds and 29 minutes 21 seconds, mark ed as Ex.Q1 (1) to Ex.Q1 (3), respectively. The recorded conversation mark Ex. Q1 (1) was having the voice of a person starting with the sentence "Hello, Namaskar, haan Amit, haan ghar pe aa jana...", mark Ex. Q1(1)(F). The recorded conversation mark Ex. Q1 (2), was having the voice of a person starting with a sentence "Hello, haan bas pahunch raha hoon haan...." mark Ex. Q1(2) (F) and mark Ex. Q1 (3), was having the voice of a person CC No. 01/15 Page No. 158 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 starting with a sentence "Aa, laiyio, Narender stamp la...." mark Ex. Q1(3)(F).

319. PW10 has further deposed that some common clue sentences / words were selected from the questioned voice mark Ex. Q1 (1)(F) and Ex. Q1(3)(F) for voice spectrographic analysis with respect to specimen voice of Fakir Chand Sharma.

320. PW10 has further deposed that the parcel marked Q2 was found containing memory card of 4GB capacity. It was found containing two recorded conversations of respective duration 50 seconds and 32 minutes 51 seconds, mark Ex. Q2(1) and Ex. Q2(2). In the recorded conversation mark Ex. Q2 (1) the voice of a person starting with the sentence "Hello, Namaskar, Amit aa raha hai..." and in the recorded conversation mark Ex. Q2 (2), the voice of a person starting with a sentence "Nikaal ke la, hajri laga le, arey bijli na ave, arey le isko ek to dispatch kar de....". Some common clue sentences / words were selected from the questioned voice mark Ex. Q2(1)(F) and Ex. Q2(2)(F) for voice spectrographic analysis with respect to specimen voice of Fakir Chand Sharma.

321. According to PW10, the parcel mark S1 was CC No. 01/15 Page No. 159 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 found containing micro SD card of 4GB capacity. The card found containing specimen voice recording of accused Fakir Chand Sharma having duration of 01 minute and 51 seconds starting with the sentence, "Ghar pe aa jana (three times).....". Some common clue sentences / words were selected from the specimen voice mark Ex. S1(F) for voice spectrographic analysis. PW10 had conducted voice spectrographic examination of common clue sentences/ words as selected with the specimen voice of Fakir Chand Sharma and it was found that these were similar in respect of their formant frequencies distribution, intonation pattern, number of formants and other general visual features in the voicegram. On the basis of above said examination, he concluded that the questioned voices mark Ex. Q 1(1)(F) to Ex. Q1(3)(F), Ex. Q2(1)(F) and Ex. Q2(2)(F) were the probable voice of specimen voice Ex. S1 (F).

322. PW10 has also identified the memory card before the court, which was found containing the questioned voice conversation and specimen voice which were received in a sealed envelope and it is stated that these are the same, which were examined by him.

323. In the cross examination this witness had stated that their office received all the material in respect of the CC No. 01/15 Page No. 160 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 present case on 24/06/2014. He has further stated that he mentioned the name of the accused in the report and on the basis of report supplied by the IO. Specimen voice was not taken in his presence. PW10 has also stated in the cross examination that he used to heard the probable voice between the questioned and specimen voice samples about 95% and there was 5% variations. So, nothing came out from the cross examination of PW10 to disbelieve his testimony and he has been able to prove the fact that the questioned voice recordings Q1 and Q2 was of accused Fakir Chand Sharma, as per specimen voice recording marked as S1 and there was no tampering in the same.

324. According to PW4 Sh. Anuj Bhatia, Nodal Officer, Vodafone Mobile Services Ltd. he has produced the call detail records of Amit Kumar having mobile no. 9711491499 of Amit Kumar and proved the call detail records Ex PW4/B. He has also proved the certificate u/Sec. 65B (4)(c) of the Evidence Act 1872 Ex PW4/C. The witness has been cross examined only on the aspect that he had extracted the call details record from the main server to which he replied that each nodal officer is having his own unique password and username to access the call detail record from main server. None other can access to print out the CDR.

CC No. 01/15 Page No. 161 of 212

CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017

325. PW13 Sh. Rajeev Ranjan, Nodal Officer, TATA Tele Services has proved the customer application form of accused Fakir Chand Sharma Ex PW13/B and CDR Ex PW13/C and production cum seizure memo Ex PW13/A. He has also proved the certificate issued u/s 65B of Indian Evidence Act as PW13/D. Nothing came out from the cross examination of this witness to disbelieve his deposition.

326. According to the CDR of mobile phone number of the complainant Ex PW4/B, the complainant had made a call to the mobile phone of accused Fakir Chand Sharma on 10/06/2014 at about 11.58 am and also at about 1.46 pm. Again CDR is showing calls made by the complainant to the mobile phone of the accused on 12/06/2014 at about 5.58 am and then at 9.02 am.

327. So, according to the CDR Ex PW4/B of the mobile of complainant, he had made two calls on 10/06/2014 at about 11.58 am and the second call at about 1.46 pm. In the examination in chief, PW1 has stated that he left for CBI office along with independent witness and CBI inspector at about 12.15 pm on 10.06.2014 and before leaving CBI office, he had made a call to accused Fakir Chand Sharma. This fact corroborated with the CDR that the call was made by the complainant to the accused at about 11.58 a.m. and also CC No. 01/15 Page No. 162 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 proves that he was not present in the school and marked his attendance falsely for 10.06.2014. According to further examination in chief of PW1 they reached Najafgarh in the vehicle of CBI at about 1.30 p.m and he had again made a call to accused Fakir Chand Sharma to ask as to whether he had reached at his house or not. This fact also corroborate with the CDR of mobile phone of complainant, so the contentions of ld. Counsel for accused as raised during the arguments are not forceful and acceptable to disbelieve the deposition of the witness and from the evidence of these witnesses i.e. PW1, PW4, PW5.

328. PW11 Sh. Rajeev Rathi has deposed that he was one of the director of M/s Computers Clinic India Pvt Ltd. since 1996. According to his deposition, they were having agreement to provide services of IT assistants in 500 Delhi Government schools through the Director, Directorate of Education, Government of NCT of Delhi which was started since July 2012. As per agreement, the payment was to be made on the basis of monthly attendance of the performance report received from the respective heads of the schools. Complainant Amit Kumar was deployed through their company in Government Coed, Senior Secondary School, Kanganheri, New Delhi since July 2012 and accused Fakir CC No. 01/15 Page No. 163 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 Chand Sharma was the principal of the said school who used to send monthly attendance/performance report of Amit Kumar to their company. When he was called by the CBI, he had supplied the relevant documents to them, which were seized vide seizure memo Ex.PW11/A. In the cross examination, PW11 has stated that their IT assistance used to collect the attendance reports from their respective school and used to deposit the same in the company and there was no such provision of imposing the penalty or deduction of salary in case of late submission of the attendance report by the IT Assistant or the school.

329. In view of above, it is clear that it was not the issue of late submission of the attendance report but the issue was that complainant was not attending the school regularly and wanted to get the attendance certificate for whole of the working days for which accused had demanded bribe because the salary was payable on the basis of actual working days.

330. PW12 Sh. K.K Malhotra has deposed that he was working as Accounts Officer in the Directorate of Education. He has provided the documents relating to the agreement executed between Director of Education, Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi and the M/s Computer CC No. 01/15 Page No. 164 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 Clinic India Pvt Ltd. to CBI, which were seized vide production cum seizure memo Ex PW12/A. The agreement with the complainant was extended from time to time and agreement of 2014 is Ex PW12/G. The original office copy of extension letter dated 24.12.2013 in respect of extension of contract of M/s Computer Clinic India (Pvt.) Ltd., was also seized vide ProductioncumSeizure Memo Ex.PW12/A. This witness has not been cross examined by ld. Counsel for the accused.

331. PW2 Sh. Binay Bhushan, Additional Director of Education (Vigilance) had deposed that in December 2014, while he was posted as Additional Director of Education (Vigilance), he had received documents/statement of witnesses recorded by the IO for obtaining sanction for prosecution against accused Fakir Chand Sharma, the then Principal, Government CoEd Sr. Secondary School, Kanganheri, New Delhi. His Excellency Lt.Governor, NCT of Delhi was the competent authority to remove accused Fakir Chand Sharma, the then Principal from his office, after fully and carefully examining the facts and circumstances of the case and after going through the statement of witnesses, documents and material placed, his Excellency Lt. Governor granted sanction for prosecution of accused Fakir Chand CC No. 01/15 Page No. 165 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 Sharma and he authenticated the same by signing the sanction order Ex PW2/A. The suggestion has been given to the witness that the sanction was granted without application of mind and without any speaking order, which has been denied by the witness. So nothing came out to disbelieve this witness also.

332. In respect of proceedings of the raid/trap proceedings, PW8 Inspector Arjun Kumar Maurya has stated that on 10/06/2014, he came to know that present RC of this case was registered, which was verified by him. He was called by his S.P, Sh. D.K.Barik, so he reached in the office of his SP where he introduced him to one person namely Sh. Amit Kumar and also informed him that he has some complaint against a Government official and he directed the complainant to go with him for the purpose of verification of the complaint. It came to his knowledge that Inspector Ramesh Kumar is the Trap Laying Officer, in the case. When he reached in CBI office, the other officers of CBI, Inspector Deepak Gaur, Inspector Sanjay Upadhyay, SI Ajeet Singh etc were there. Two independent witnesses namely Sunil Thapliyal and one more witness was present there. Complainant Amit Kumar was present in the office and was having a sum of Rs.10,000/ in the form of 10 GC notes of CC No. 01/15 Page No. 166 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 Rs.1000/ each. The distinct numbers of these GC notes were noted down in the handing over memo. Inspector Sanjay Upadhyay sprinkled the phenolphthalein powder on the said GC notes and one witness was asked to touch the said GC notes. Thereafter his hands were got washed in the solution of water and sodium carbonate. In doing so, the said solution turned pink. After giving the demonstration, the said solution was thrown away. PW8 has further deposed that thereafter, remaining phenolphthalein powder was returned back to the malkhana. TLO Inspector Ramesh Kumar instructed to wash the hands of all the trap team members with soap and water. Thereafter, a file was made containing FIR, verification memo, A4 size blank papers, carbon papers and some stationery material etc. The trap kit was arranged containing clean glass bottles, spoon candles, sealing material, sodium carbonate and some money about Rs.400 to 500 to meet the expenses. All the proceedings were recorded in a handing over memorandum and all the trap team members had signed the same. The said handing over memo is Ex.PW1/C.

333. PW8 had further deposed that before leaving the office, the introductory voices of both the independent witnesses were recorded in the 4GB micro SD card through DVR.

CC No. 01/15 Page No. 167 of 212

CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017

334. PW8 has further deposed that all the trap team members left the CBI office at about 08.00 a.m in one or two government vehicles. The complainant was also having his own car. They reached near the Govt. CoEducational Sr. Secondary School, Kanganheri at about 9.30 a.m. On reaching there, the government vehicle was parked at some distance from the school. The independent witness Sunil Thapliyal, who was sitting in the car of the complainant went inside the school. At that time, the DVR was given to him by putting it in recording mode. The remaining trap team members took their positions near the school. From place, where he was standing, the complainant was visible to him and he saw that complainant was talking with some person who was sitting on the cot under a tree. The independent witness Sunil Thapliyal was directed to talk with accused Fakir Chand Sharma on the pretext of admission of his son in the school. After sometime, TLO Inspector Ramesh Kumar informed all the trap team members to go inside the school. Accordingly, all the remaining trap members went inside the school. The complainant introduced them with accused Fakir Chand Sharma and stated that accused had received the bribe amount. Inspector Ramesh Kumar challenged the accused Fakir Chand Sharma for taking illegal gratification from the complainant to which accused became perplexed. Before CC No. 01/15 Page No. 168 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 challenging the accused, the DVR was taken back from the complainant and was switched off. Thereafter, the hand wash of both the hands of the accused Fakir Chand Sharma was taken in a solution of sodium carbonate separately and in doing so, it turned pink. The said washes were transferred in clean glass bottles and and were sealed with the seal of CBI.

335. PW8 has further deposed that complainant had told during the conversation that he requested to the accused to reduce the demand amount of bribe from Rs.10,000/ to which the amount was reduced to Rs.9000/ from Rs.10,000/ by the accused and complainant had handed over Rs.9000/ to accused Fakir Chand Sharma and kept the remaining Rs.1000/ GC note with him. The distinct number of GC notes of Rs.9000/ recovered from the accused were noted down in the recovery memo Ex.PW1/D. PW8 has further deposed that the money was recovered from the left side shirt pocket of accused Fakir Chand Sharma. Accordingly, the wash of left side pocket of shirt was also taken and on doing so, the said solution turned pink. After taking the pocket wash, the same was transferred in a clean glass bottle. PW8 has identified before the court the half sleeve checkdar shirt with blue green creamish colour Ex.PW1/T as the same shirt which was worn by accused Fakir Chand Sharma on CC No. 01/15 Page No. 169 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 12.06.2014 at the time of trap. PW8 has also identified three bottles containing left hand wash, right hand wash and left side shirt pocket wash of accused as Ex.PW1/P, Ex.PW1/Q and Ex.PW1/R.

336. According to complainant PW1, on 12/06/2014 at about 07:00 a.m. he again visited the office of CBI along with Rs.10,000/ which were in denomination of Rs.1000/ each GC notes. Thereafter, another CBI officer Ramesh Kumar took the said Rs.10,000/ from him and he made the details of the said notes. At that time, two independent witnesses Dharambir Singh and Sunil Thapliyal were also present in the office and said notes were also shown to them by the CBI officers in his presence. He has further stated that said notes were smeared with some powder and demonstration was given to him and the independent witnesses and independent witness Dharambir Singh was asked to touch the said notes and thereafter he was asked to wash his hands and when he had washed his hand, the water changed into pink colour. Then the CBI officials had thrown the said water. He has further stated that on that day, he had taken his own vehicle/car make Maruti Suzuki Swift and as per the direction of CBI official, one independent witness, Sunil Thapliyala alongwith SI Arjun Kumar Maurya sat in his car CC No. 01/15 Page No. 170 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 and other CBI officials and other independent witness Dharambir were in another CBI vehicle and then they all left the CBI office at about 7.30 a.m to Govt. CoEducation Sr. Secondary School, Kaganheri, New Delhi. He has further deposed that when they reached near IGI Airport, then the accused Fakir Chand Sharma gave him missed call on his mobile phone no. 9711491499 from his mobile phone. He immediately disclosed this fact to CBI SI Arjun Kumar Maurya. On this, they parked their vehicle aside on the road and then SI Arjun Kumar Maurya called another CBI officer Ramesh Kumar from another vehicle and disclosed this fact to him and then CBI officer Ramesh Kumar, switch on the DVR and asked him to call accused Fakir Chand Sharma. Then he made a call to accused Fakir Chand Sharma from his mobile by putting his mobile in speaker on mode. From the other side, accused Fakir Chand Sharma asked him as to how much time will he take to reach the school. At some distance from the school in question of accused, the DVR was put in his front pocket of the shirt by the CBI officers to record the conversation between him and the accused. They reached at the Govt. CoEd. Sr. School, Kanganheri New Delhi at about 9.30 a.m. The CBI officials remained present outside the school with Dharambir Singh and another independent witness got down from his car outside the school gate. He CC No. 01/15 Page No. 171 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 went in his car inside the school and independent witness Sunil Thapliyal followed him on foot at that time inside the school. He went to the office of the school, where he paid regards to the staff members by saying good morning. In the meantime, independent witness Sunil Thapliyal went to the accused Fakir Chand Sharma, Principal to make enquiry regarding admission. At that time, the accused was sitting on cot in the varanda of the school near the principal room/office. He also went to the accused Fakir Chand Sharma and he was directed to go to the another nearby school to get the print out of the circular and email as there was no electricity in the school at that time. He also sat on the chair brought by him from the school and sat on the chair near the accused Fakir Chand Sharma. During the conversation of demanded amount by the accused, he disclosed that such demanded amount was huge for him, but the accused stated that there were too expensive things now a days in the market so the accused could not do anything. Firstly the accused agreed for Rs.9,500/, but he again made a request to reduce the said amount more, then accused told him that now he will take Rs.9,000/ and not less than the said amount. Thereafter, he took out Rs.10,000/ from his pocket and after taking out one note of Rs.1000/ from the said amount, remaining amount of Rs.9,000/ was handed over CC No. 01/15 Page No. 172 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 to accused Fakir Chand Sharma by him and accused hold the said amount in his left hand and immediately kept the same in his front pocket of his shirt. He made request to count the same but the accused stated that it was not required. Thereafter he asked the accused to complete the work assigned to him and he informed the CBI officials from his mobile phone from the distance of 20 steps away from the place, where the accused was sitting on a cot.

337. PW1 has further stated that thereafter CBI official Ramesh Kumar alongwith other CBI official and independent witness Sh. Dharambir Singh came inside the school and those were followed by CBI SI Arjun Kumar Maurya. At that time the accused was sitting on the cot and was apprehended and caught hold by his both wrists. Thereafter, out of other officials, who also accompanied them, one of them took out the DVR from his pocket and switched it off and they took out their identity cards of CBI and showed to accused that they were the officers of CBI to which the accused could not understand and took it in a funny way and he started laughing on them. When the entire team of CBI reached near the accused, they asked to go inside the Principal room, but the accused asked them to finish the matter there itself by taking something (kuchch le dekar). The other staff of the CC No. 01/15 Page No. 173 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 school came to the spot. The CBI officials also gave their introduction to the other staff of the school. Thereafter, the Vice Principal Sh. Om Prakash was also called by the CBI officials and he was told each and every thing by the CBI officials. Thereafter, CBI officials directed the independent witness Dharambir Singh to take out the bribe money from the pocket of accused Fakir Chand Sharma and he took out the same. The vice principal Om Prakash arranged water there. Thereafter, the hand washes of the accused were taken separately and in doing so, the colour of the water turned into pink. The said water was then transferred in the separate bottles and was sealed with the seal of CBI. Thereafter, the pocket wash of the shirt worn by accused Fakir Chand Sharma was taken and in doing so, the colour of the pocket of the shirt was changed into pink. The said wash was also transferred into glass bottle and was sealed with the seal of CBI. The shirt worn by the accused was sealed with the seal of CBI. The nine GC notes recovered from the accused were tallied with the numbers of the GC notes mentioned in the memo. Thereafter, he handed over one GC note to the CBI officer. These GC notes were sealed by the CBI. Thereafter the proceedings were drawn. After sealing the bottles, shirt and other material, the seal was handed over to the independent witness.

CC No. 01/15 Page No. 174 of 212

CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017

338. PW1 has identified his complaint before the court as Ex.PW1/A, verification memo Ex.PW1/B, handing over memo Ex.PW1/C, recovery memo as Ex.PW1/D and site plan Ex.PW1/E.

339. PW1 has further deposed that the copy of the recorded conversation taken place between him and accused during the trap were played as well as voice of accused Fakir Chand Sharma on that day and CBI officers prepared the transcript of the same and had drawn voice identification memo Ex.PW1/F. The rough transcript of the recorded conversation which took place between the accused and him on 10.06.2014 is Ex.PW1/G and of 12/06/2014 Ex PW1/H. He has also identified the customer application form of his mobile phone as Ex PW1/J. He has also identified before the court one GC note of Rs 1000/ and also other 9 GC notes of Rs 1000/ each as the same which were after trap were seized and sealed at the spot. He has also identified three glass bottles containing Ex.RHW, Ex.LHW and Ex.Left Side Shirt Pocket Wash as Ex.PW1/P, Ex.PW1/Q and Ex.PW1/R. He has also identified half sleeves checkdar shirt with blue, green, creamish colour as Ex.PW1/T. PW1 has also identified micro SD card as Ex.PW1/U1 and the same has been played in the court. After hearing the conversation in the micro SD card CC No. 01/15 Page No. 175 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 with the help of laptop, PW1 has stated that this conversation, which had taken place in between him and accused, transcription of which is Ex.PW1/G. Thereafter another micro SD card Q2 of 4 GB make Kingston was taken out from the sealed envelope. It was also played in the laptop and after hearing the conversation, it was found containing introductory voice of witness Dharambir Singh, transcription of the same is Ex.PW1/H. PW1 has also identified his conversation with accused of 12/06/2014 and tallied the transcription of the same.

340. It is contended by ld. counsel for accused that according to PW10 Sh. Deepak Kumar Tanwar, Senior Scientific Officer GradeI (Physics), CFSL, CBI, New Delhi, their office had received all the materials in respect of this case on 24/06/2014 and according to his examination, their office had received three sealed parcels Q1 and Q2 and transcription of recorded conversation S1, whereas according to PW1 on 17/07/2014 CBI officer had prepared transcription of the recorded conversation taken place between accused and him during the raid and trap proceedings, so on 24/06/2014 the transcription could not be sent to the office of PW10 Sh. Deepak Kumar Tanwar for analysing Q1, Q2 and S1.

CC No. 01/15 Page No. 176 of 212

CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017

341. PW5 is independent witness Sh. Sunil Thapliyal. According to him, he had attended the office of CBI on 10.06.2014, on the directions given by his Chief Manager. Accordingly, he visited CBI office and met SI A.K. Maurya, who introduced him with Sh. Amit Kumar, who lodged a complaint regarding demand of illegal gratification of Rs.10,000/ by Sh. Fakir Chand Sharma, Principal of Govt. CoEduction Sr. Secondary School, Village Kanganheri, New Delhi. He had gone through the complaint. SI Arjun Maurya wanted to verify the complaint, filed by the complainant Sh. Amit Kumar and in order to verify the complaint, a DVR was arranged by SI A.K. Maurya and an external memory card was inserted in it and after ensuring that it does not contain any prerecorded conversation, his introductory voice was recorded in the memory card. Thereafter, it was decided to make a call to Principal, Fakir Chand Sharma from the mobile of complainant Sh. Amit Kumar and a call was made. It was informed by the Principal, Fakir Chand Sharma that he was coming to his residence and asked the complainant to reach at his residence. This call was simultaneously recorded in the DVR by keeping the mobile on the speaker mode. Thereafter, he alongwith Inspector A.K. Maurya, complainant Sh. Amit Kumar went to Najafgarh in an official vehicle. On reaching there, complainant Sh. Amit Kumar informed them that CC No. 01/15 Page No. 177 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 accused will not talk with him in presence of someone. As such, it was decided to put the DVR in the pocket of complainant Sh. Amit Kumar after switching it on. Complainant Sh. Amit Kumar entered into the residence of Fakir Chand Sharma. After 15 to 20 minutes, complainant Sh. Amit Kumar came back from the residence of accused Fakir Chand Sharma. SI A.K.Maurya took back the DVR from the complainant and switched it off. Thereafter, they left the residence of Principal, Fakir Chand Sharma and came back to the office of CBI and the recorded conversation in the DVR was heard with the help of laptop, which confirmed the demand of illegal gratification to the tune of Rs.10,000/ on the part of Principal, Fakir Chand Sharma. Thereafter, the memory card was taken out from the DVR and it was sealed with the seal of CBI and the seal was handed over to him for its safe custody. Thereafter, some documents were also prepared. The complainant as well as him were directed by SI A.K. Maurya to attend the CBI office on 12.06.2014 early in the morning at about 06:30 a.m. On 12.06.2014, he reached CBI office at about 06:30 a.m. He was introduced with a trap team having witness Dharambir and some 45 CBI officials, including complainant. Thereafter, the complainant produced the bribe money of a sum of Rs.10,000/, which he had brought with him in the form of 10 GC notes of Rs.1,000/ CC No. 01/15 Page No. 178 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 each in denomination. Some powder was sprinkled on the said GC notes. Independent witness Sh. Dharambir Singh was asked to touch the same and he had touched the same. Thereafter, he was directed to put his hands in the water. On doing so, the colour of the water turned into pink. After demonstration, the said water was thrown out. The number of said GC notes were noted down in a document. The said GC notes were put in the pant pocket of complainant Amit Kumar by independent witness Sh. Dharambir Singh. Thereafter, all the team members were directed to wash their hands and they washed their hands. Thereafter, they started the proceedings. PW5 has identified handing over memo Ex.PW1/C, bearing his signatures.

342. PW5 has further stated that before proceeding to the spot, a DVR and a new memory card was arranged, which was inserted in the DVR. After ensuring that it does not contain any prerecorded conversation, his introductory voices as well as of other independent witness Dharmabir Singh were recorded. Thereafter, all trap team proceeded from CBI office to the spot in two vehicles, one was of the complainant and another one was of the CBI. He alongwith one Inspector of CBI was with complainant Amit Kumar in his vehicle and remaining trap team members including the CC No. 01/15 Page No. 179 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 independent witness Sh. Dharambir Singh were in the another government vehicle. The complainant Amit Kumar received a call from Principal, Fakir Chand Sharma. Then immediately the vehicle was stopped and DVR was put in recording mode. The complainant Amit Kumar talked with Principal Fakir Chand Sharma on putting his mobile on speaker on mode. It was asked by the accused in how much time he was reaching in the school to which complainant had replied that he was coming within half an hour. Thereafter, the DVR was switched off and they proceeded towards the school.

343. PW5 has further deposed that on reaching near the Government school at village Kanganheri, New Delhi, the vehicles were stopped and complainant was directed to enter into the school and he was asked to act as shadow witness with the complainant. The other trap team members remained outside the said school and it was directed to the complainant to make a call after completion of the transaction of the illegal gratification to Principal Fakir Chand Sharma. The complainant went inside the school first and then he followed him as shadow witness. In the school, he made enquiry regarding the Principal on the pretext that he wanted to get admitted his nephew in the school. He was CC No. 01/15 Page No. 180 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 asked to wait as the Principal was in the meeting. When the Principal became free, he came out and sat on a cot as there was no electricity. Principal Fakir Chand Sharma enquired from him regarding the admission of his nephew and asked him to bring some documents regarding the education of his nephew. Thereafter, the Principal asked him to go outside from the school. So, he reached outside and joined the trap team members. He further deposed that after some time, IO had received a call from complainant Amit Kumar, informing that Principal Fakir Chand Sharma had accepted the illegal gratification. The CBI team rushed inside the school. Two Inspectors caught hold the accused Fakir Chand Sharma from his both wrists. The DVR was taken back from the complainant by one of the Inspectors and was switched off. Thereafter, again a fresh solution was prepared by the CBI officials and the the fingers of left hand of Fakir Chand Sharma were dipped in the said solution. On doing so, the said solution turned pink which was transferred in a clean bottle and was sealed with the seal of CBI. Thereafter, the tainted bribe amount taken out by independent witness Dharambir Singh from the left side shirt pocket of Principal Fakir Chand Sharma was counted and found Rs.9,000/ in denomination of 9 GC notes of Rs.1000/ each. Complainant had informed that accused Fakir Chand Sharma demanded CC No. 01/15 Page No. 181 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 Rs.10,000/ but after negotiation accused agreed to accept Rs.9,000/ from him as such he had only handed over Rs.9,000/ and kept one GC note of Rs.1000/ with him. Thereafter the said GC notes were sealed in two bundles keeping Rs.9000/ in one bundle and Rs.1000/ in another bundle. Thereafter, pocket wash of wearing shirt of accused Fakir Chand Sharma was taken in a freshly prepared solution, which also turned pink. The said solution was then transferred in clean glass bottle and was sealed with the seal of CBI. Thereafter, some documents were prepared by the CBI i.e., recovery memo Ex.PW1/D, 9 GC notes in the denomination of Rs 1000/ each as Ex.PW1/L and PW1 had identified the same which were recovered from the left side shirt pocket of accused Fakir Chand Sharma and were signed by all trap team members including the witness and the complainant. He has also identified one GC note of Rs 1000/ as Ex.PW1/N, site plan Ex.PW1/E, arrest cum seizure memo Ex.PW5/A, recovery memo Ex.PW1/D, and three glass bottles as Ex.PW1/P, Ex.PW1/Q and Ex.PW1/R, the memory card as Ex.PW1/U1 which was used on 10/06/2014 and another memory card Ex.PW1/U2, which was used on 12/06/2014 and seized vide recovery memo Ex.PW1/D, seal which was handed over to him after use as Ex.PW5/D. PW5 has further deposed that after one or quarter past one month, he again CC No. 01/15 Page No. 182 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 attended the office of CBI. The investigation copy of recorded conversation which took place between the accused Fakir Chand Sharma and the complainant Amit Kumar during the verification proceedings and trap proceeding was played through the official laptop of CBI. The complainant Amit Kumar identified his own voice as well as the voice of Principal Fakir Chand Sharma in the said conversation which was prepared vide transcription Ex.PW1/G and Ex.PW1/H. IO had also prepared voice identification memo dated 17/07/2014 Ex.PW1/F. In the cross examination PW5 has stated that no conversation between the accused and the complainant had taken place in his presence. He has further stated that he wrote the conversation after hearing the same from the DVR and prepared the transcript. He had also signed on the transcript along with complainant.

344. Another independent witness is PW6 Sh. Dharamvir Singh, who has deposed that he visited the office of CBI on 12/06/2014 on the direction of his higher officers at about 06:30 a.m. or 06:45 a.m. and met CBI Inspector Sh. Ramesh Kumar, who informed him that the Principal of Kanganheri School is demanding bribe from complainant Amit Kumar. Thereafter, his voice was recorded by Inspector Ramesh Kumar.

CC No. 01/15 Page No. 183 of 212

CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017

345. PW6 has further deposed that thereafter, Sh. Amit Kumar produced a sum of Rs.10,000/ in the denomination of Rs.1000/ each. The details of those GC notes were noted down. Thereafter, some powder was sprinkled on those GC notes. Thereafter, a demonstration was given to explain the chemical reaction of that powder. In doing so, the colour of the water changed into pink. The said water was thrown away. Thereafter, he was asked by the CBI officer to put the said GC notes of Rs.10,000/ in the pocket of Amit. Accordingly, he put those GC notes in the pocket of complainant Amit Kumar. Thereafter, they left the CBI office for going to Kanganheri School in two vehicles. He was in the vehicle alongwith CBI staff and complainant Amit Kumar was in the separate vehicle alongwith another independent witness Sh. Sunil Thapliyal and some CBI staff. They reached near the Kanganheri School at about 09:30 a.m. On reaching there, he alongwith some CBI officials remained outside the school and complainant Amit Kumar and independent witness Sunil Thapliyal went inside the school. After 15 to 20 minutes, the CBI staff received a call. Thereafter, he alongwith the other CBI officials went inside the school. The Principal of the school was caught hold by the CBI officials from his both wrists, after entering in the school. It was informed that accused Fakir Chand Sharma had accepted the CC No. 01/15 Page No. 184 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 bribe amount from the complainant Amit Kumar. He was asked by the CBI officials to took out the bribe amount from the wearing shirt pocket of accused Fakir Chand Sharma. Accordingly, he took out the said amount from the left side shirt pocket of the accused Fakir Chand Sharma. On counting the same, it was found Rs.9,000/. The remaining Rs.1,000/ note was taken from the complainant Amit Kumar. The said notes recovered from the accused Fakir Chand Sharma were tallied with the numbers noted down earlier. These GC notes were tallied and found correct with the list in which the serial numbers were already recorded. Thereafter, the hand washes of both hands of the accused Fakir Chand Sharma were taken separately and in doing so, the colour of the said water changed into pink. The said water was transferred in the separate bottle and then the bottle was sealed with the seal of CBI. Thereafter, the wash of the wearing shirt pocket of accused Fakir Chand Sharma was taken and in doing so, the colour of the shirt water was also changed into pink. The said water was transferred into a glass bottle and the said bottle was sealed with the seal of CBI. Thereafter, some writing work was done by CBI officers and they signed the same. Thereafter some more items were also seized and after sealing the documents, the seal used for sealing was handed over to him for safe custody. PW6 has produced the seal CC No. 01/15 Page No. 185 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 Ex.PW6/A before the court, handing over memo as Ex.PW1/C, recovery memo as Ex.PW1/D, site plan Ex.PW1/E, arrest cum personal search memo of accused Ex.PW5/A, one GC note of Rs 1000/ as Ex.PW1/N and right hand wash, left hand wash and left side shirt pocket wash of the accused Fakir Chand Sharma as Ex.PW1/P, Ex.PW1/Q and Ex.PW1/R, shirt of accused Ex.PW1/T, one micro SD card make Kingston having recording dated 12/06/2014 was also identified vide voice identification memo Ex.PW1/F and the transcriptions Ex.PW1/G and Ex.PW1/H.

346. In the cross examination, PW6 had deposed that on 11/06/2014, he had received a letter from his higher authorities to go to the CBI office in the morning hours on 12/06/2014. He has further stated that complainant and independent witness Sh. Sunil Thapliyal had gone inside the school together. PW1 and PW5 have stated that firstly complainant had entered the school and thereafter PW5 had entered the school as shadow witness. This contradiction is pointed out by ld. counsel for accused is minor one and not effecting truthfulness of deposition of the witnesses. In the cross examination the suggestion was given to PW6 is that writing work was not done at the school as it was dark at that time inside the school to which witness has stated that CC No. 01/15 Page No. 186 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 there was no dark as it was the month of June and the sunlight is available upto 7 pm or 7.30 pm.

347. Beside the independent witnesses arranged by CBI i.e., PW5 and PW6, there is one more independent witness to the trap proceedings of 12/06/2014 i.e., PW14 Sh. Om Prakash, who was working as Vice Principal during that time. On that day, he was present in the school and while doing some work, he heard some loud noise outside and came out from his office to know what was happening outside. He saw two people were holding the wrists of accused Fakir Chand Sharma and the peon was coming to his chamber for calling him. He came near to the place where the persons were gathered around Fakir Chand Sharma. The persons, who were holding the wrists of Fakir Chand Sharma had told to him that they were CBI officials. They also told him that Fakir Chand Sharma was caught by them in matter of obtaining bribe from Amit Kumar, IT Assistant of the school. They also asked him to remain present with them till completion of formalities. Search of Fakir Chand Sharma was taken in his presence and Rs.9,000/, in the denomination of Rs.1000/ currency note each were recovered from the left side shirt pocket, which accused was wearing. These notes were kept in an envelope and sealed. PW14 has identified those notes as CC No. 01/15 Page No. 187 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 Ex.PW1/L (Colly.) and another currency note as Ex.PW1/N. Thereafter, CBI personnel had taken out a glass from their bag and asked him to bring water in that glass. There after glass water was arranged which was provided by the peon. Then CBI officials told him that they are going to mix some powder in the water kept in glass. Then a powder was put in the water and glass containing clean water was shaken but the colour of the clean water did not change. Thereafter, accused Fakir Chand Sharma was asked to dip his left hand fingers in the said clean water glass and on dipping the left hand fingers by the accused Fakir Chand Sharma, the clean water of the glass turned into pink colour. The said pink colour water was poured in a bottle and the bottle was sealed and his signatures were obtained on the slip of paper affixed on the bottle itself. PW14 has identified the bottle containing left hand wash as Ex.PW1/Q. Similarly right had wash of accused was also taken by dipping his right hand fingers in the clean water glass and on dipping the right hand fingers by the accused Fakir Chand Sharma, the clean water of the glass turned into pink colour. This water was also transferred in a bottle Ex.PW1/P. Thereafter pocket wash of was taken and this solution was also transferred into a glass bottle which is Ex.PW1/R and these bottles were signed by him on the slip of paper affixed on the bottles itself. The shirt of the accused CC No. 01/15 Page No. 188 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 was also sealed in his presence.

348. PW14 has further deposed that thereafter, CBI officials played a memory card after taking out it from the recorder, in which conversation of Fakir Chand Sharma and Sh. Amit Kumar was recorded by CBI. That memory card was played by using a laptop. Thereafter, the said memory card Ex.PW1/U1 was sealed in an envelope.

349. It is contended by ld counsel for accused that playing of the memory card before the witness is not deposed by the complainant and the independent witnesses or by the IO in any manner, which shows that no such memory card was played before this witness i.e. PW14 and it was so no explanation has been given as to why the other witnesses have not deposed this fact, so this clearly casts suspicion on the proceedings conducted by the CBI Officers.

350. PW14 has further deposed that after completing the formalities, CBI officials asked him to produce attendance register of school staff i.e., Ex.PW14/A (of 17/04/2014), attendance registers of May 2014 & June 2014 Ex.PW14/B. CBI officials had written certain papers in the school itself including a report of the proceedings running into 15 to 20 sheets and he signed the same as Ex.PW1/D. He had also CC No. 01/15 Page No. 189 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 proved the productioncumseizure memo dated 26.06.2014, vide which certified copy of service book of accused Fakir Chand Sharma and relieving letter and joining letter of Fakir Chand Sharma was seized from him as Ex.PW1/C. The certified copy of the service book is Ex.PW14/D. The attendance reports of IT Assistant Sh. Amit Kumar is Ex.PW1/DX (colly).

351. This witness under cross examination has been put question on the signing of the attendance certificate to which PW14 has stated that it was not mandatory to sign the attendance certificate on the last day of the month, but it could be signed in the first 34 days of the next month. PW14 has further deposed that complainant had never made any complaint to him against the accused Fakir Chand Sharma. He does not remember if he had issued any experience certificate to the complainant. Even in the cross examination, this witness has stated that his room was adjacent to the principal's room in that school and at about 9.3010 am, he had heard loud noise from outside of his office room and when he came out of his room to know the cause of said loud noise, he found that the peon was coming to call him. The name of the said peon was Kanhaiya Lal. He has further stated that in the school CBI had worked in the CC No. 01/15 Page No. 190 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 candle light on that day, while sitting in the varandah in front of the principal room and CBI officials remained present in the school till late evening, which itself shows that all the proceedings were conducted in the school itself.

352. In his further cross examination, PW14 has stated that in his presence GC notes of Rs.1000/ was handed over by the complainant from his possession to the CBI officials, which also corroborate with the depositions of the other witnesses to the extend that GC note of Rs 1000/ was also taken into possession in the school itself from complainant Amit Kumar by CBI which complainant had able to save after bargaining of bribe amount, which was to be paid to the accused Fakir Chand Sharma. PW14 has also denied that no recovery was effected from the accused in his presence. He also denied that the alleged recovery was manipulated and planted upon the accused by the CBI officials.

353. This cross examination of PW14 itself naggates the contentions raised by ld. Counsel for the accused that no recovery was effected in his presence.

354. PW9 Inspector Ramesh Kumar has stated that he was working as Inspector in CBI, ACB, New Delhi since 2012 and this case RC No. DAI2014A0018 was registered on CC No. 01/15 Page No. 191 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 12/06/2014 in CBI, ACB, New Delhi against accused Fakir Chand Sharma, Principal, Govt. CoEd. Sr. Sec. School, Kanganheri, New Delhi, on the basis of complaint Ex PW1/A lodged by Sh. Amit Kumar dated 10/06/2014. The said complaint was marked to SI A. K. Maurya by the then Superintendent of Police, ACB Sh. D. K. Barik ACB, New Delhi for verification. PW9 has further stated that he had conducted the verification of the said case and submitted his verification report dated 10/06/2014 Ex PW1/B to SP, CBI, ACB, New Delhi. The FIR of the case was marked to him for investigation. The FIR Ex PW9/A of the case bears the signatures of Sh. D. K. Barik and that of the complainant Sh. Amit Kumar.

355. PW9 has further deposed that when the case was entrusted to him for investigation. The team was constituted of himself, Inspector Sanjay Upadhyay, Inspector Deepak Gaur, Inspector B. S. Meena, SI A. K. Maurya and SI Ajeet. Thereafter, the presence of two independent witnesses namely Sh. Sunil Thapliyal and Dharamvir Singh was secured through Duty Officer, CBI, ACB, New Delhi. The complainant Sh. Amit Kumar was introduced with the trap team members and both the independent witnesses. After interaction with Sh. Amit Kumar by the team members and independent CC No. 01/15 Page No. 192 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 witnesses, it was decided to lay down the trap against accused Fakir Chand Sharma, as he was demanding a bribe of Rs.10,000/ from the complainant Sh. Amit Kumar, for completing the attendance of Sh. Amit Kumar as complainant was working as IT Assistant in the Govt. Co Education Sr. Sec. School, Kanganheri, New Delhi. The attendance was required by the complainant Amit Kumar for taking his salary from his firm i.e. Computer Clinic India Pvt. Ltd. through which he was posted in the school. The attendance was required duly attested by the Principal of the aforesaid school. After that a DVR was arranged by SI A. K. Maurya alongwith a sealed 4 GB memory card. The sealed memory card was shown to both the independent witnesses and it was desealed and after checking the emptiness of the memory card, it was inserted in the DVR. Thereafter, memory of the said card was selected through DVR and the formal introductory voices of both the independent witnesses were recorded. Thereafter, complainant Sh. Amit Kumar produced a sum of Rs.10,000/, in the denomination of GC notes of Rs.1,000/ each. The notes were smeared with phenolphthalein powder by Inspector Sanjay Upadhyay. Thereafter, a solution of sodium carbonate was prepared in a glass tumbler to demonstrate the reaction of phenolphthalein powder with the solution of Sodium Carbonate. The CC No. 01/15 Page No. 193 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 independent witness Sh. Dharamvir Singh was asked to touch the said smeared GC notes and thereafter he was requested to dip his fingers in the solution of Sodium Carbonate. In doing so, the colour of the said solution turned pink. After demonstration, the solution was thrown away and the glass tumbler was washed. Thereafter, the distinct numbers of GC notes produced by Sh. Amit Kumar were mentioned in the handing over memo Ex.PW1/C. The smeared GC notes were put in the left pocket of jeans worn by complainant Sh. Amit Kumar by independent witness Sh. Dharamvir Singh. Before keeping the GC notes in the pocket of the complainant Sh. Amit Kumar, the search was carried out by Inspector Deepak Gaur. Nothing incriminating was found from the possession of the complainant Sh. Amit Kumar. The complainant was only allowed to carry his mobile phone and the treated GC notes to the tune of Rs.10,000/. Sh. Sunil Thapliyal was directed to act as a shadow witness and to accompany the complainant in order to see the transaction and to overhear the conversation which was likely to be took place between the complainant Sh. Amit Kumar and the accused Fakir Chand Sharma. The complainant was directed to give a miss call from his mobile to his official mobile no. 9650094287. Complainant Amit Kumar was also directed to hand over the bribe amount to the accused on his specific demand.

CC No. 01/15 Page No. 194 of 212

CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017

356. PW9 has further deposed that thereafter a trap kit was arranged, which was consisting of a leather bag, sealing material, white papers, complaint of Sh. Amit Kumar and verification report alongwith FIR, sodium carbonate powder, clean glass bottles. The pretrap proceedings were recorded in the handing over memo and all the trap team members including independent witnesses and the complainant signed the same. The complainant Sh. Amit Kumar was requested to take his personal car, because he always used this car to go to school for duty. Thereafter, it was decided that complainant Sh. Amit Kumar and independent witness Sh. Sunil Thapliyal would use the same car and CBI team and another independent witness Sh. Dharamvir Singh would use two official vehicles. Accordingly, the CBI team alongwith Sh. Dharamvir Singh left CBI office at about 08:00 hours and complainant Sh. Amit Kumar and Sunil Thapliyal used the personal car of the complainant.

357. PW9 has further deposed that CBI team followed the car drove by the complainant. While the trap team was on the way, complainant Sh. Amit Kumar stopped his car and informed that he had received a miss call from the mobile phone of accused Fakir Chand Sharma. After that, complainant was allowed to make a call on the mobile phone CC No. 01/15 Page No. 195 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 of the accused Fakir Chand Sharma. The same was simultaneously recorded in the DVR in the presence of Sh. Sunil Thapliyal by switching on the DVR in recorded mode and the complainant was directed to keep his mobile on speaker mode. In this call accused Fakir Chand Sharma was asking the complainant about his location and how much time he would take to reach at the school. Thereafter, the DVR was switched off and again was kept in the pocket of complainant Sh. Amit Kumar.

358. PW9 has further deposed that the CBI team and the complainant Sh. Amit Kumar reached near the school at about 09:30 hrs. The CBI vehicles were parked in disguise manner near the school. The complainant Sh. Amit Kumar and independent witness Sh. Sunil Thapliyal were directed to go inside the school. Independent witness Sh. Sunil Thapliyal was directed to meet with the Principal and to take a plea of admission of his child in the school. Accordingly, Sh. Amit Kumar and independent witness Sh. Sunil Thapliyal entered in the school. After some time Sh. Sunil Thapliyal came out from the school and on query, he disclosed that he met with accused Fakir Chand Sharma and the accused directed him to come to the school after summer vacations alongwith his child and documents for his admission. He also disclosed that CC No. 01/15 Page No. 196 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 Sh. Amit Kumar started talking with accused Fakir Chand Sharma. Thereafter, a call was received by him from the mobile of the complainant and the complainant told that accused Fakir Chand Sharma had accepted the bribe amount from him.

359. PW9 has further deposed that thereafter all the team members and another independent witness Sh. Dharamvir Singh were alerted and entered in the school. After entering in the school, it was seen that the complainant was talking with a person, who was sitting on a charpai, whose age was about 5657 years, was identified by the complainant as accused Fakir Chand Sharma. After identification, both the hands of accused Fakir Chand Sharma were caught from his wrists by him and Inspector Sanjay Upadhyay. SI A. K. Maurya was directed to take back the DVR from the complainant. Accordingly, the DVR was taken back from the complainant and was switched off.

360. PW9 has further deposed that the complainant Sh. Amit Kumar disclosed that accused Fakir Chand Sharma had taken the bribe amount of Rs.9,000/ from him and the said amount was kept by the accused in his left side shirt pocket. Thereafter, fresh water was arranged from the school and a solution of sodium carbonate was prepared in a glass tumbler.

CC No. 01/15 Page No. 197 of 212

CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 Accused Fakir Chand Sharma was asked to dip his right hand fingers in the said solution. In doing so, the said solution turned pink. The same was transferred in a glass bottle, which was sealed with the seal of CBI. Thereafter another fresh solution of sodium carbonate was prepared in a glass tumbler. Accused Fakir Chand Sharma was asked to dip his left hand fingers in the said solution. In doing so, again the said solution turned pink. The same was also transferred in a glass bottle, which was also sealed with the seal of CBI. The white paper labels were pasted on the said bottles and the said bottles were marked as RHW and LHW respectively.

361. PW9 has further deposed that while the trap proceedings were going on, accused Fakir Chand Sharma was asked about the bribe taken by him from the complainant but accused kept mum. Some employees/ staff gathered near the spot. One staff member Sh. Om Prakash, Vice Principal of the school was requested to accompany the CBI team for further trap proceedings. Thereafter independent witness Sh. Dharamveer Singh was asked to recover the bribe amount from the left side pocket of accused Fakir Chand Sharma. Accordingly, independent witness Sh. Dharamveer Singh took out the bribe amount from the pocket of accused Fakir Chand Sharma. Both the independent witnesses were directed to CC No. 01/15 Page No. 198 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 telly the GC notes from the numbers mentioned in the handing over memo. Both the witnesses counted the bribe money and found that they were Rs. 9,000/ and after tallying with the number mentioned in the handing over memo they confirmed that these were the same GC notes which were produced by the Complainant Amit Kumar in the CBI Office. Both the independent witnesses had signed on the said memo after tallying the bribe amount recovered from accused Fakir Chand Sharma.

362. PW9 has further deposed that thereafter the complainant Sh. Amit Kumar was asked about another one GC note of Rs.1,000/. On being asked, he produced one GC note of Rs.1,000/ denomination and stated that the accused Fakir Chand Sharma was agreed to accept Rs.9,000/ for completing his attendance after a negotiation between them. The said GC note was taken back from the complainant and handed over to Sh. Dharamvir Singh to keep that separate from the recovered bribe amount.

363. PW9 has further deposed that thereafter a Tshirt was arranged from the market and the wearing shirt of accused Fakir Chand Sharma was got changed. Thereafter a fresh solution of sodium carbonate was prepared in a glass tumbler. The left side shirt pocket of the shirt of the accused CC No. 01/15 Page No. 199 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 Fakir Chand Sharma was dipped in the said solution. In doing so, the said solution turned pink. Then the said solution was transferred in a glass bottle, which was further sealed with the seal of CBI. A white paper label was pasted on the said bottle and the same was marked as Left Side Shirt Pocket Wash.The label pasted on these three bottles were got signed by him, both the independent witnesses, Sh. Om Prakash, VicePrincipal of the school and accused Fakir Chand Sharma. The pocket of the shirt was also signed by him, both the independent witnesses, Sh. Om Prakash, VicePrincipal of the school and accused Fakir Chand Sharma. The said shirt was put in a white cloth and the same was sealed with the seal of CBI. The cloth was also got signed by him, independent witnesses and by accused Fakir Chand Sharma.

364. PW9 has further stated that thereafter accused Fakir Chand Sharma was asked some questions but he gave evasive replies. Thereafter, the conversation recorded in the memory card through DVR was heard in the presence of independent witnesses, Sh. Om Prakash, Vice Principal, accused Fakir Chand Sharma and other trap team members. The said conversation established that accused Fakir Chand Sharma demanded and accepted bribe of Rs.9,000/ from the complainant Sh. Amit Kumar.

CC No. 01/15 Page No. 200 of 212

CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017

365. PW9 has further deposed that Sh. Om Prakash, Vice Principal was asked to produce attendance register pertaining to the attendance of the complainant Sh. Amit Kumar. Accordingly, he produced the same. The said register was shown to the complainant Sh. Amit Kumar. On being shown, the complainant said that accused Fakir Chand Sharma had made entry of his attendance by that day itself, for the period from 09/06/2014 till 12.06.2014 i.e., the day of trap. The entry of attendance of 12/06/2014 was reflecting that Sh. Amit Kumar joined the school on 12/06/2014 at 08:00 hrs. and at 08:00 hrs the complainant was present with the CBI team. Both registers were taken into possession. Both the independent witnesses were directed to sign on each page of the registers.

366. PW9 has further deposed that thereafter 4 GB memory card the DVR, was inserted in the official laptop by him and the contents of the memory card were transferred in the official laptop for the purpose of investigation. Thereafter the said memory card was taken out and was sealed with the seal of CBI after packing it in its plastic case, which was marked as Q2. The signatures of both the independent witnesses were obtained on the plastic case. After that the same was kept in a brown colour envelope, which was CC No. 01/15 Page No. 201 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 marked as Q2 and was sealed with the seal of CBI. The signatures of both the independent witnesses were also taken on the brown colour envelope.

367. PW9 has further deposed that the personal search of the accused was taken and a separate arrestcumpersonal search memo was prepared vide memo Ex PW5/A. The proceeding of the trap were recorded in a recovery memo Ex PW1/D.

368. PW9 has further deposed that after sealing the documents, the brass seal was handed over to independent witness Sh. Dharambir Singh with the direction to produce the same before the court as and when required. PW9 has identified the three glass bottles marked LHW, RHW and Left Side Shirt Pocket Wash as Ex PW1/Q, Ex PW1/P and Ex PW1/R and shirt of accused as Ex PW1/T, nine GC notes as Ex PW1/L (colly), one GC note as Ex PW1/N, mobile phone with battery of accused Fakir Chand Sharma as Ex PW5/B. PW9 has further deposed that sample of voice of the accused Fakir Chand Sharma was taken in the presence of independent witness Sh. Ashish Tomar, LDC, DDA vide specimen voice memorandum Ex PW7/A and attendance register for the months of May and June is Ex PW1/DX1.

CC No. 01/15 Page No. 202 of 212

CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017

369. During the cross examination, PW9 had stated that the call was the confirmation sign regarding acceptance of bribe amount by the accused Fakir Chand Sharma from the complainant. He has further stated that on 12/06/2014, complainant informed that accused Fakir Chand Sharma was demanding a bribe of Rs 10,000/ from him for completing his pending attendance. PW9 has stated that he had not verified that the accused had already lodged a complaint against the complainant to his department regarding threat of complainant to implicate him in a false case. During cross examination PW9 has denied the suggestion that the complainant was the son of their colleague that is why accused has been falsely implicated in the present case without necessary verification of the facts.

370. In defence accused has produced one witness in his defence i.e., DW1 Sh. Durgesh Kumar who had brought the summoned record i.e., the Diary Register of Personal Branch w.e.f 29/04/2014 to 28/07/2014 maintained in their office in which all the correspondences received used to be entered with respect specific diary number. He has further stated that as per record, the letter vide diary no. 1954 was received on 20/05/2014 which was a RTI application having ID No. 8921 dated 13/05/2014. Someone has added 'A' after CC No. 01/15 Page No. 203 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 serial no. 1954 in the original entry to show the same as serial no. 1954A to justify the another entry made in between serial no. 1953 and 1954 as originally were made in the register. The entry at serial no. 1954 dated 19/05/2014 appearing at the bottom of the register is forged and fabricated for which a vigilance enquiry is going on.

371. DW1 has further deposed that the complaint against Sh Amit Kumar as appearing in entry no. 1954 was never received in their office. Photocopy of relevant pages of the register Ex DW1/A and copy of RTI originally received and which was entered at serial no. 1954, which was also showing the serial number at point X2 as Ex DW1/B.

372. DW1 has been cross examined by ld. counsel for accused as he was not giving the true facts before the court. During cross examination by ld. counsel for accused, DW1 has stated that entries have been made in the register in some pages till the bottom of such pages. DW1 has denied the suggestion that the entry appearing at alleged serial no. 1954 A is forged and fabricated. He has further denied the suggestion that entry appearing at serial no. 1954 is genuine i.e., complaint given against Sh. Amit Kumar.

373. In view of above, the said defence witness is not CC No. 01/15 Page No. 204 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 helpful to the accused in any manner and accused has not been able to prove that complainant has falsely implicated him in the present case, as alleged.

374. It is contended by ld. counsel for the accused that the job of preparing the attendance certificate and marking of attendance and submission of said certificate was the job of complainant himself and that the attendance certificates of complainant duly signed by principle of the school were already lying deposited with the office of complainant month wise and none of the certificate was pending. The said attendance certificate was of May 2014 and was not bearing any date, so it was not certain whether the said attendance certificate was signed on 12/06/2014 and was handed over to the complainant only then. It was given to the complainant after deal had taken place with the complainant vide which the complainant had agreed to pay bribe amount as demanded by the accused.

375. The further contention of the Ld. defence counsel not forceful that parcel and seizure memos the memory cards were in plastic box but there was no plastic box at the time of opening parcels in FSL.

376. The further contention of ld. counsel for the CC No. 01/15 Page No. 205 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 accused is that there is contradiction about the specimen voice of the accused was recorded either in DVR or in mobile as according to PW7 the specimen voice of the accused was recorded in the Mobile on 13/062014, whereas as per CBI officers the alleged specimen voice was recorded in DVR. This contradiction is not affecting the trustworthiness of the deposition of the witnesses being minor one.

377. The judgments relied upon by the Ld. counsel for the accused are not applicable to the facts and circumstances of the present case.

378. Ld. Senior Public Prosecutor has contended that in respect of the contentions of Ld. counsel for the accused to the extent that transcription was supplied to PW10 Sh. Deepak Kumar Tanwar, Voice Analyst on 24.06.2014, whereas according to the witnesses the same was prepared on 17.07.2014, case diary can be seen by this court.

379. According to the case diary, the rough transcription was started to be prepared with the help of witnesses on 18.06.2014 and 19.06.2014 and the same could not be concluded being lengthy and was finalized on 17.07.2014. Even according to the CD of the case, on 24.06.2014 no transcription was sent to PW10 Sh. Deepak CC No. 01/15 Page No. 206 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 Kumar Tanwar and it seems that it was sent later on after 17.07.2014 because the report has been submitted by PW10 somewhere in January 2015, hence, the fact that the transcription was received by PW10 on 24.06.2014 has appeared in the record inadvertently as the same could not be sent to PW10 before 17.07.2014.

380. In view of above, the contradiction as pointed out by Ld. counsel for the accused is not forceful in any manner.

381. PW7 Sh. Ashish Tomar has deposed that on 13/06/2014, he visited the office of CBI and met with Inspector Ramesh Chand Sharma, who introduced him to Sh. Fakir Chand Sharma. Inspector Ramesh Kumar had obtained the specimen voice of Fakir Chand Sharma in a micro SD card by using a new mobile phone. Thereafter the said micro SD card was sealed with the seal of CBI and prepared a specimen voice memorandum dated 13/06/2014 Ex PW7/A and he signed the same.

382. PW7 has further stated that the seal which was used for sealing the micro SD card was handed over to him is Ex.PW7/B.

383. During the cross examination, PW7 has stated that he does not recollect the exact time, when he reached in CC No. 01/15 Page No. 207 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 the office of CBI on 13/06/2014 but reached to the CBI Office after marking his attendance in his office. He has further deposed that he does not remember whether his statement was recorded by CBI or not. He has further stated that prior to 13/06/2014, he does not know either Inspector Ramesh Kumar or accused Fakir Chand Sharma.

384. PW3 Sh. V. B. Ramteke, Sr. Scientific Officer, GradeI (Chemistry), CFSL has stated that he had received three sealed bottles for laboratory examination and expert opinion on 24/06/2014 which were sealed with the seal of CBI. The seals were intact and were tallied with the specimen seal sent with the forwarding letter. The exhibit bottles were marked as Ex. LHW, Ex. RHW and Ex. Left Side Shirt Pocket Wash of accused Fakir Chand Sharma. He has further deposed that on chemical examination, all the above exhibits found to be contained Phenolphthalein. The remnants of the exhibits were sealed with his seal VBR, CHEM, DIV, CFSL, CBI, NEW DELHI.

385. PW3 has further deposed that his report is Ex.PW3/A and the letter vide which the aforesaid bottles were forwarded to CFSL, is Ex.PW3/B. He has further deposed that the three glass bottles Ex.1/P, Ex.1/Q and Ex.1/R are the same bottles, which were examined by him.

CC No. 01/15 Page No. 208 of 212

CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017

386. Nothing has come up in the cross examination of this witness except the fact that the report prepared by him Ex.PW3/A was got typed and prepared by his staff under his dictation and then he signed the same.

387. PW15 Inspector Gur Sewak Singh has deposed that he remained posted on deputation in CBI, Anti Corruption Branch (ACB) as Inspector from April 2012 to May 2015 and investigation of the present case was handed over to him by the orders of the then SP, CBI, ACB, Delhi on 13/06/2014. He had taken over the charge of this case along with the documents/articles seized or prepared from its first IO Inspector Ramesh Kumar vide case diary.

388. PW15 has further deposed that during investigation, he had recorded the statements of relevant witnesses, seized the documents from different authorities as well as from the mobile service providers, got the exhibits of this case sent to chemical examiner and voice examiners of CFSL for their examination. He also got the voices identified through complainant vide a voice identification memo in presence of both the independent recovery witnesses and also got prepared a transcription of the conversations recorded with the help of witnesses and complainant. He had received the reports from CFSL. After completion of investigation, he CC No. 01/15 Page No. 209 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 had obtained sanction for prosecution against the accused from the competent authority and filed charge sheet before the court. This witness identified the seizure memos (i) Ex PW14/C (ii) dated 02/07/2014 Ex PW11/A; (iii) dated 04/07/2014 Ex PW11/E; (iv) dated 01/08/2014 Ex PW14/G;

(v) dated 07/10/2014 Ex PW12/A; (vi) dated 24/07/2014 Ex PW4/A; (vii) dated 16/07/2014 Ex PW13/A. This witness had also identified the voice identification memo dated 17/07/2014 Ex.PW1/F which was prepared by him; rough transcription of the recorded conversation Ex.PW1/H, which took place between the accused and the complainant during the proceedings on 12/06/2014; forwarding letter dated 24/06/2014 Ex.PW3/B and the forwarding letter Ex.PW15/A.

389. During cross examination PW15 has denied the suggestion that during investigation he came to know that father of the complainant was working in CBI. So, this witness has also not supported the version of accused that complainant falsely implicated him in this case as his father was working in CBI.

390. In view of above, the CBI has been able to prove beyond reasonable doubt the demand of bribe as alleged and acceptance of the same, which was recovered of Rs.9,000/ CC No. 01/15 Page No. 210 of 212 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : 19.09.2017 from the possession of accused in presence of independent witnesses. Accordingly, accused is held guilty and convicted for offence under Section 7 and under Section 13 (1)(d) punishable u/Sec. 13 (2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

Announced in the open court on 19.09.2017 (Virender Kumar Goyal) Special Judge03 (PC Act)/ CBI/ PHC / ND CC No. 01/15 Page No. 211 of 212 IN THE COURT OF SPECIAL JUDGE03, (P. C. ACT) (CBI) PHC, NEW DELHI CC No. 01/15 CBI Vs. Fakir Chand Sharma 22.09.2017 Present : Sh. Manoj Shukla, Ld. Sr. PP for the CBI.

Convict Fakir Chand Sharma is produced in JC. Sh. N. C. Sharma, Ld. counsel for the convict.

Vide separate order, the convict Fakir Chand Sharma has been sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for 03 years and a fine in the sum of Rs.20,000/, under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. In default of payment of fine, he shall undergo simple imprisonment for six month.

Convict Fakir Chand Sharma has been further sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for 04 years and a fine in the sum of Rs.20,000/, under Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, punishable u/Sec. 13(2) of the PC Act, 1988. In default of payment of fine, he shall undergo simple imprisonment for six month.

Both the sentences shall run concurrently.

Benefit u/Sec. 428 of Cr.PC is also given to the convict for the period already undergone by him in custody as stated from 13.06.2014 to 20.06.2014.

Fine deposited.

File be consigned to the Record Room.

(Virender Kumar Goyal) Special Judge(03),CBI,PC Act PHC : ND :22.09.2017

Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Delhi District Court

Cbi vs . Fakir Chand Sharma Judgment Dated : ... on 22 September, 2017