Parkash Chand vs State Of Punjab
2022 Latest Caselaw 15852 P&H

CRA-S-1526-SB of 2005                                      [1]

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
                      AT CHANDIGARH
                           CRA-S-1526-SB of 2005
                           Date of Decision: 6th December, 2022

Parkash Chand
                                                                  Appellant
                                     Versus

State of Punjab
                                                                 Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN

Present:    Mr. Karminder Singh and Mr. Prabhsher Singh Walia,
            Advocates for the appellant.
            Mr. Arun Luthra, DAG, Punjab.
            ****

AVNEESH JHINGAN, J (Oral):

1. Aggrieved of conviction in FIR No.44 dated 11.6.1998, under

Sections 7 and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (for short,

'the Act'), Parkash Chand (appellant) is in appeal.

2. The facts as set up by the prosecution are that on complaint of

Om Parkash, a Press Reporter, FIR was registered. On 27.10.1997, he filed

an application in M.A. Branch of the office of Deputy Commissioner,

Ferozepur for the title of the newspaper. The appellant had to complete the

formalities and forward the application with his recommendations. On

9.6.1998, the appellant demanded bribe of Rs.1,000/- for doing the needful,

the deal was struck for Rs.500/- and the complainant was told to come on

11.6.1998. On complaint, a trap was laid. Five currency notes of the

denomination of Rs.100/- each were laced with Phenolphthalein Powder.

Mahesh Kumar was the shadow witness and Sudhish             Kumar, Junior

Engineer the      official witness. After giving instructions to the shadow




                                1 of 6

 CRA-S-1526-SB of 2005                                       [2]

witness and the complainant, raiding party reached the office of the

appellant. The complainant and the shadow witness went towards the office

while the remaining members of the raiding party were standing at a

distance waiting for the signal from the shadow witness. The appellant

enquired about the bribe, the complainant answered in affirmative and

handed over the laced currency which was kept in the front pocket of the

shirt by the appellant. On signal from the shadow witness, the raiding party

apprehended the appellant. In hand wash test, colour of Sodium Carbonate

solution turned pink and the tainted amount was recovered from the front

pocket of the shirt of the appellant. On washing of the pocket of the shirt

with Sodium Carbonate solution, the colour turned pink.

3. The prosecution to prove its case examined seven witnesses.

4. In statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C., the appellant claimed

innocence. It was stated that he had no connection with the issuance of title

of newspaper and it was duty of Parkash Singh Miscellaneous Clerk-I. The

complainant forcibly tried to thrust the notes in his pocket and when he

resisted, the notes fell down on the ground and in the meantime, Vigilance

staff came and implicated him in a false case.

5. The trial court considered that the complainant, shadow

witness and the official witness have supported the prosecution story to

prove the demand and acceptance. It was noted that in hand wash test, the

colour of solution turned pink. The appellant was convicted under Sections

7 and 13(2) of the Act vide judgment dated 17.8.2005 and vide order of

even date was sentenced as under:

2 of 6

CRA-S-1526-SB of 2005 [3]

Under Section Punishment Fine In default of payment of fine 7 of the Act Rigorous Rs.1,000/- Rigorous imprisonment for imprisonment for one year two months 13(2) of the Act Rigorous Rs.1,000/- Rigorous imprisonment for imprisonment for two years three months

6. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant

was not dealing with the issuance of title of newspaper. He further submits

that it was job of Parkash Singh who was on leave on the day the trap was

laid and the appellant was falsely implicated.

7. Learned counsel for the State defends the impugned judgment.

He submits that demand and acceptance has been duly proved. The laced

currency was recovered from the appellant. The contention is that the

shadow witness and the complainant have stated that the appellant

demanded money for forwarding the application.

8. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

9. The complainant and the shadow witness in their testimonies

have supported the case of prosecution. It was stated that on demand made

by the appellant, the tainted currency notes were handed over. The relevant

portions of the depositions of PW1-Om Parkash and PW5-Mahesh Kumar

are reproduced below:

"Testimony of PW1-Om Parkash complainant ... He asked me as to whether I had brought the bribe money or not. I gave him those five currency notes of Rs.100/- denomination each. He counted the same and put in the front pocket of his shirt which he was wearing.

               xx                 xx                    xx




                                  3 of 6

 CRA-S-1526-SB of 2005                                         [4]

thereafter, the hands of Parkash Chand were dipped in that water and the colour of that water turned pink.

xx xx xx Thereafter, the currency notes were taken from the pocket of the accused. The serial numbers of the currency notes tallied with their serial numbers mentioned in the memo Ex.P2.

xx xx xx However, when the pocket was washed in that water, its colour again changed to pink."

Testimony of PW5-Mahesh Kumar shadow witness I alongwith Om Parkash had gone to the office of accused. Accused was present in the office. Accused present in court enquired about money from Om Parkash. Then Om Parkash had handed over marked currency notes to accused and currency notes were kept by the accused in the left pocket of his shirt.

xx xx xx Then accused was directed to wash his hands in the same water, then colour of water was changed to light pink.

xx xx xx After that shirt of the accused was got removed and portion of the pocket was washed in glass of water summoned again to which powder was added. Colour of water had change and the coloured water was transferred in a nip..

xx xx xx Number of the notes were tallied with the numbers already noted by the DSP and the currency notes were taken into possession vide memo Ex.P4.."

10. The recovery of tainted currency from the appellant is not in

dispute. It was duly substantiated by the deposition of the complainant,

shadow witness, official witness and the Investigating Officer. Though in

statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C., it was stated that the complainant

4 of 6

CRA-S-1526-SB of 2005 [5]

forcibly tried to give the amount and on resistence the notes fell down.

From the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses and the exhibits, the

prosecution has proved that the tainted currency notes were recovered from

the pocket of the shirt of the appellant. There is no challenge to the fact

that on washing the hands and pocket of the shirt of the appellant with

Sodium Carbonate solution, the colour turned pink. In other words,

demand, acceptance and recovery of the amount has been duly proved.

11. Now adverting to the contention raised that it was a case of

false implication and the appellant was not having the official capacity to

deal with the title of the newspaper lacks merit. Reliance placed on duty

list Ex. D4 is of no help. The exhibited document is neither numbered nor

dated. It is not forthcoming from the document as to when this working

roster was implemented.

12. There is another aspect to be considered that the Investigating

Officer took into possession the file of the complainant for the title of

newspaper containing nineteen leaves and other file containing two leaves

which were lying on the table of the appellant.

13. The contention raised needs to be dealt with from another

angle that no explanation was put forth by the appellant explaining the

possession of tainted currency. In the absence of challenge to the demand,

acceptance and recovery of bribe, the presumption under Section 20 of the

Act for the purpose of Section 7 of the Act is to be drawn against the

appellant. The presumption under Section 20 of the Act is rebuttable but no

explanation was given by the appellant for rebutting it.

14. The prosecution successfully proved demand, acceptance and

5 of 6

CRA-S-1526-SB of 2005 [6]

recovery and in the absence of rebuttal to presumption invoked under

Section 20 of the Act, the conviction and sentence of the appellant is

upheld.

15. The appeal is dismissed.

                                             [AVNEESH JHINGAN]
                                                  JUDGE
6th December, 2022
mk
           1. Whether speaking/ reasoned            :     Yes / No
           2. Whether reportable                    :     Yes / No




                                   6 of 6