Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Further case of the prosecution was that appellants Jagdev Singh and Amarjit Singh used to get Rs.360/- and Rs.500/- per truck, respectively as illegal gratification. On 15.12.1994, both the appellants demanded Rs.5,000/- each as illegal gratification from the complainant for accepting the consignment of 250 bags of rice brought in two trucks at FCI, FSD, Bholath including the arrears. Shamsher Singh, driver of the truck was with the complainant when the appellants demanded the illegal gratification. The appellants refused to accept the consignment till illegal gratification was paid to them. By making false promise to the appellants that he would arrange the money within three hours, the complainant accompanied by Shamsher Singh went to the office of Vigilance Bureau at Kapurthala where he narrated the entire occurrence to DSP Harish Kumar regarding the demand raised by the appellants by making statement Ex. PW1/1. The complainant produced amount of Rs.10,000/- in the shape of 100 currency notes of the denomination of Rs.100/- each before DSP Harish Kumar, who applied phenolphthalein powder to the same. Their numbers were noted in two memos Ex. PW1/2 and Ex. PW1/3, which were attested by the witnesses. The currency notes of Rs.5,000/- mentioned in memo. Ex.PW1/2 were meant to be given to appellant Jagdev Singh on his demand and those mentioned in memo. Ex. PW1/3 to appellant Amarjit Singh on his demand. Before these tainted currency notes were entrusted to the complainant, DSP Harish Kumar satisfied himself that the complainant had no other money with him. Demonstration was given before the complainant and Shamsher Singh. A glass of water was brought in which sodium carbonate was mixed. The colour did not change but when phenolphthalein powder was mixed in the solution, the colour turned into pink. The solution was destroyed. DSP Harish Kumar washed his hands with soap. Demonstration memo. Ex. PW1/4 was prepared. DSP Harish Kumar gave instructions to the complainant to hand over the tainted currency notes to the appellants on their demand and Shamsher Singh was instructed to given signal while acting as a shadow witness. Rajiv Kumar, Clerk in the PWD(B&R) Department was joined in the raiding party. The purpose of raid was explained to him. After making endorsement Ex. PW10/1 on statement Ex. PW1/1, DSP Harish Kumar sent the same to Police Station Bholath where FIR Ex.PW10/2 was registered against the appellants. Thereafter, the raiding party reached the gate of the FCI godown at Bholath and stood there whereas the complainant and Shamsher Singh went inside the FCI godown. Shamsher Singh stood at some distance whereas the complainant entered the room where both the appellants were sitting. Both the appellants asked the complainant as to whether he had done their work. The complainant replied in the positive and handed over the currency notes of Rs.5,000/- to appellant Jagdev Singh on his demand, who put the same in the pocket of his jacket. Thereafter, the complainant paid Rs.5,000/- to appellant Amarjit Singh, who after accepting the same also put it in the pocket of his pant. Shamsher Singh gave the appointed signal to the raiding party. DSP Harish Kumar and others entered the room where both the appellants were found sitting on chairs on their separate tables whereas the complainant was sitting in front of the table of appellant Amarjit Singh. DSP Harish Kumar disclosed his identity to the appellants. The wrists of both the appellants were captured. First of all, the hands of appellant Jagdev Singh were got washed in a solution prepared in the glass containing water and sodium carbonate, the colour whereof turned pink. The solution was sealed in nip Ex. P1 and was seized vide seizure memo. Ex. PW1/5, which was attested by the witnesses. Thereafter, the DSP conducted the search of appellant Jagdev Singh and from the inner pocket of his jacket, 50 currency notes of the denomination of Rs.100/- each were recovered. The numbers of these currency notes were compared, which tallied. The currency notes were taken into possession vide recovery memo Ex. PW1/6, which was attested by the witnesses. Further personal search of appellant Jagdev Singh led to recovery of Rs.4,000/- in cash and a wrist watch, which were taken into possession vide memo. Ex. PW1/11. The inner pocket of the jacket was washed in a solution of water and sodium, the colour of which turned pink. It was sealed in nip Ex.PW2/1, which was seized vide seizure memo. Ex. PW1/7. The jacket Ex. P2 was also taken into possession. Similarly, the hands of appellant Amarjit Singh were got washed in the solution of water and sodium carbonate, the colour of which turned pink. The solution was sealed in nip Ex. P3, which was seized vide seizure memo. Ex. PW1/9. It was attested by the witnesses. The search of appellant Amarjit Singh led to recovery of Rs. 5,000/- from the right pocket of his pant. Their numbers were also tallied. The currency notes were seized vide seizure memo. Ex. PW1/8 which was also attested by the witnesses. Rs.300/- in cash and identity card were recovered from the personal search of appellant Amarjit Singh which were taken into possession vide seizure memo. Ex. PW1/12. The right pocket of the pant of appellant Amarjit Singh was dipped in the solution of water and sodium. The solution turned pink. It was sealed in nip Ex. P4, which was taken into possession vide recovery memo. Ex.PW1/10. DSP Harish Kumar prepared site plan Ex.PW10/3 of the place of recovery. The attendance registers Exs.PW4/6 and PW4/7 were taken into possession. Inward and outward registers were also taken into possession from Bakshish Singh, Chowkidar, which contained entries Exs. PW9/1 PW9/2 regarding the entry of two trucks. Both the appellants were brought to Police Station Bholath where they were lodged and the case property was also deposited there.

When examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C., appellant Jagdev Singh stated that on 15.2.1994 he came to FCI godown at Bholath at 11.30 a.m. after collecting the receipts regarding the payment of freight from the railway office, Kapurthala. He received the message that Harish Kumar DSP was requiring his presence in Police Station Bholath in connection with some complaint against him. He reached Police Station at Bholath at 1.30 p.m. Harish Kumar DSP told him that he was not accepting the rice of the mill of Bhola Nath to which he replied that it was not his duty to accept the rice. He also told Harish Kumar DSP that rice of Bhola Nath may not be according to the prescribed standard. Therefore, the rice might not have been accepted. Jagdev Singh further pleaded that Bhola Nath was tout of the police. The DSP felt offended against him (appellant Jagdev Singh). He was implicated in this false case at the instance of Bhola Nath. The FCI officials observed strike for 2/3 days in protest against this false case. Shamsher Singh was driver on the truck owned by Manpreet Rice Mill, Begowal. He was a false witness. Appellant Jagdev Singh further stated that Bhola Nath had grudge against him as earlier to 15.12.1994 he had rejected 2/3 consignments of his mill. This case was foisted against him by Bhola Nath on account of said grudge.

Learned counsel for the appellants had submitted that PW3 Rajiv Kumar, who was associated with the raiding party for overseeing the recovery, had not supported the case of the prosecution. Rather, he had stated that when both the appellants were apprehended by the DSP, he left for urinating and when he returned in ten minutes' time, he noticed that the DSP had already conducted the personal search of both the appellants and the tainted money was lying on the table.

Apparently, PW3 Rajiv Kumar had been won over by the appellants and, therefore, did not support the prosecution case regarding the recovery of the tainted money from the personal search of the appellants. Memo Ex. PW1/6 in respect of recovery of tainted notes from Jagdev Singh appellant and Ex. PW1/8 in respect of Amarjit Singh appellant wherein it was clearly mentioned that the tainted currency notes were recovered from their jacket and shirt, respectively by DSP Harish Kumar bore the signatures of PW3 Rajiv Kumar. In his examination-in-chief, he stated that the recovery memos Ex. PW1/6 and PW1/8 were attested by him. Therefore, the statement made by him during his cross-examination by the Public Prosecutor that the personal search of the appellants was not conducted in his presence, cannot be accepted. Even if his testimony is left out of consideration, still the prosecution had led sufficient evidence to establish that after the demand and acceptance of the bribe money by the appellants, DSP Harish Kumar alongwith others members of the raiding party had entered the room where both the appellants were secured from their wrists. The personal search of both the appellants led to recovery of the tainted money from them. The hand wash of both the appellants had resulted in the clear solution turning into pink. Similarly, the inner pocket of the jacket worn by appellant Jagdev Singh as well as the right pocket of the pant of Amarjit Singh appellant were dipped in the solution of white and sodium carbonate and each time the solution turned pink. The aforementioned facts had surfaced in the testimonies of PW1 Bhola Nath, PW2 Shamsher Singh and PW10 DSP Harish Kumar. The aforementioned evidence when accepted would be sufficient to hold that the appellants had received the illegal gratification and after receiving the same, placed the same in their wearing apparels from where they were recovered.

Ex.PW1/2, the details of 50 currency notes of the denomination of Rs.50/-, which were meant for Jagdev Singh appellant, were mentioned while in the entrustment memo. Ex. PW1/3, the details of notes meant for Amarjit Singh appellant were mentioned. However, the notes mentioned in the entrustment memo. Ex. PW1/3 were recovered from the jacket worn by Jagdev Singh appellant while the currency notes mentioned in the entrustment memo. Ex. PW1/2 were recovered from the pant of Amarjit Singh appellant. It appears that by mistake PW1 Bhola Nath had handed over the tainted currency notes meant for Jagdev Singh appellant to Amarjit Singh appellant and vice-versa. However, that would not be sufficient for disbelieving the prosecution case.