Hazura Singh vs State of Punjab

I.S. Tiwana, J. (Oral)

The appellant who was working as a Patwari in Patwar Circle Salabatpur which included the village Gospura of the complainant (Jit Singh PW 8), has been convicted and sentenced to one year''s rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 500/ under section 161 I.P.C. read with sections 5(2) and 5(1)(d) of the Prevent Of Corruption Act, 1947.

The prosecution version which I has been accepted against him is that Jit Singh PW 8 wanted to secure a copy of the Jamabandi in order to raise certain loan from the Primary Land Mortgage Bank, Rampura Phul and when he approached the appellant for the said purpose he was put off more than once. Ultimately on 2821983 the appellant agreed to supply the said copy on payment of Rs. 200/ as gratification. As a result of the haggling which PW Jit Singh entered into with him it was ultimately settled that the appellant would supply the copy on the next day on receipt of Rs. 100/ as bribe money. Since Jit Singh PW was not willing to Pay this amount and had not reconciled with the attitude Of the appellant, be talked about it with his friend Garja Singh PW 10 who advised him i.e., Jit Singh to approach the Vigilance Inspector at Bhatinda in order to get the appellant duty punished for his nefarious activity both the PWs then approached Bhagwant Singh, Vigilance Inspector PW 11 and disclosed all the above noted details to him. Inspector recorded the statement of Jit Singh, Exhibit PE, and obtained his signatures in token of its correctness. Two currency notes worth Rs. 50/ each were also handed over by Jit Singh to the Vigilance Inspector. The latter treated the same with Phenolphthlein powder and returned the same to Jit Singh vide memo Exhibit PG with the instructions that he had to pass on the said currency notes to the appellant at the time of obtaining of the copy of the Jamabandi required by him. Garja Singh PW 10 was also instructed to act as a shadow witness and was directed that at the time of the passing of the bribe money to the appellant by Jit Singh, he would give a signal to the police party by placing his hand on his head. The statement of Jit Singh. Exhibit PE, was, sent by the Inspector with his endorsement Exhibit PE/1 to Police Station. Dialpura for the registration of a case. On the basis of the same formal first information report Exhibit PE/2 was registered by M.H.C. Bant Singh. Thereafter the police party along with PWs Jit Singh and Garja Singh started for village Salabatpura in a jeep. On the way they also joined Krishan Chand Bansal PW 9 a teacher in a Government High School. He was introduced to PWs Jit Singh and Garja Singh and was made aware of the entire plan. On reaching the village while Jit Singh and Garja Singh went ahead towards the Patwarkhana, the other members of the party including Krishan Chand PW 9 and Vigilance Inspector PW 11 stayed behind at a short distance. Jit Singh PW went inside the Patwarkhana while Garja Singh stopped near the door. As Jit Singh PW entered the room the appellant ask him if he had brought the money as promised. On this Jit Singh handed over the tainted currency notes Exhibits P1 and P2 to the appellant. The latter while accepting the same put these in the front right hand side pocket of his shirt over which he was wearing a woollen Jersey. On this the copy of the Jamabandi Exhibit PB which was lying prepared on the table of the accused was handed over by him to Jit Singh PW. In the meantime Garja Singh PW 10, as arranged, gave the signal to the police party. On entering the room Bhagwant Singh Vigilance Inspector introduced himself to the appellant and apprehended him from the arms after assuring him that he was carrying nothing incriminating on his person. The Inspector then effected the personal search of the appellant and recovered currency notes Exhibits P1 and P2 from the right hand side pocket of his shirt. The numbers or the currency notes tallied with those of the memo Exhibit PG which was prepared it) the office of the Vigilance Inspector. The same were put in an envelope vide memo Exhibit P 6 which was sealed with the seal of the Inspector and signed chit of Krishan Lal PW. It was taken into possession vide memo Exhibit PW. Thereafter the Inspector prepared solution of sodium carbonate in water in a tumbler in which hands of the accused were dipped one by one. The colour of the water turned pinkish and the solution was secured in a bottle Exhibit P3 which too was sealed with the seal of the Inspector and signed chit of Krishan Chand PW. The same was taken into possession vide memo Exhibit PJ. In another freshly prepared solution of the same type, the reversed front pocket of the shirt (Exhibit P 5) of the appellant was also dipped and its colour too turned pinkish. This solution was also secured in a phial Exhibit P4 along with the shirt Exhibit P5 vide memo. Exhibit PK. On further search of the appellant, Rs. 290/ besides a watch and a pen were also recovered from his possession. Copy of the Jamabandi Exhibit PB was also taken into possession, vide memo Exhibit PM. After completing the necessary formalities and obtaining the sanction for the prosecution of the appellant vide Exhibit PA from the District Collector the appellant was sent up for trial with the result as already indicated in the opening part or the judgment. This version of the prosecution has consistently been supported by all the material witnesses i.e. Jit Singh PW 8, Krishan hand PW 9, Garja Singh PW 10 and Vigilance Inspector PW 11.

At the trial the plea of the appellant, under section 313 Cr.P.C., was :

"I am innocent. I wanted to give note on the Jamabandi regarding the previous sales and the cultivation of the land by G. Balasre and Jit Singh PW was asking me not to do so and he then tried to thrust the currency notes in my pocket of shirt and in the struggle the currency notes fell on the ground and in the meantime the raiding party headed by Bhagwant Singh Inspector came there who apprehended me and foisted the recovery upon me."

Having heard, the learned counsel for the parties, I find no infirmity in the conclusions and conviction recorded by the lower Court. The primary submission of Mr. Punia, learned counsel for the appellant is that it is well established on the record that prior to 131983, the day on which Jit Singh PW claims to have obtained the above noted copy of the Jamabandi (Exhibit PB), this witness had already transferred his entire land in village Gospura and inview of that fact he had nothing to mortgage with the Land Mortgage Bank for purpose of loan. According to the learned counsel if the purpose for obtaining this copy of the Jamabandi is not established or is to be doubted then the whole prosecution story has to to be thrown out as according to him the very motivating force which made Jit Singh PW to talk over the matter to Garja Singh PW and the Vigilance Inspector, was not there, This submission of the learned counsel does not cut any ice in view of the fact that it is the conceded care of the appellant that PW Jit Singh did need a copy of the Jamabandi (Exhibit PB) and had approached him for the said purpose. If the appellant accepts, as be does, that the copy of the Jamabandi (Exhibit PB) was needed by Jit Singh PW then the purpose for which it was needed simply pales into insignificance. The short question is whether for supply this copy or the Jamabandi, the appellant did demand bribe and accepted Rs. 100/ as such on 131983. So far as this aspect of the matter is concerned, I find nothing shaky or doubtful in the prosecution version in the light of the statements of these witnesses i.e. Jit Singh, Garja Singh and the Vigilance Inspector. The recovery of this tainted money from the possession of the appellant is well established by the evidence of these very witnesses besides that of Krishan Chand PW 9 also. This witness, as already pointed out earlier, was a teacher in a Government High School and there is nothing whatsoever to doubt his statement. Further I find that the defence plea on the face of it deserves to be discarded as a simple concoction.

As discussed earlier it is not disputed by the appellant that PW Jit Singh did ask him for the supply of a copy of the Jamabandi and in that regard he did prepare Exhibit PB. Just a look at this document shows that it is a completed document and besides the signature of the appellant, bears the certificate that:

i) it was a true copy of the original;

ii) it had been prepared at the instance of Jit Singh PW; and

iii) the requisite fee had already been charged by him and the relevant entry had been made at No. 43 of the Copying Fee Register.

In the face of all this, it is difficult to imagine how can the appellant or bit learned counsel urge plausibly that the appellant was still in the process of preparing this document when the police party raided his Patwarkhana and took this document into possession; In the face of this factual position. It is again not acceptable that the appellant was in any way insisting upon the recording or not recording of certain entries in the copy and it was on that amount that this case was foisted upon him. Still heavier circumstances which to my mind completely belies the plea of the appellant is that if 131983 was the first day that Jit Singh PW had met the appellant for securing this copy of the Jamabandi how could Jit Singh assume that the appellant would not agree to the preparation of this copy in a particular manner i.e. by avoiding the recording of certain entries and therefore, he should secure the presence of the Vigilance Inspector and other members of the raiding party at the relevant time. Further, there are no telltale marks or any struggle on the person or clothes of the appellant. As per his stand the trained currency, notes Exhibits P1 and P2 were forcibly put in his pocket. There was no wearing, tearing or scratching of the clothes of the appellant when the tainted money was taken out by the Vigilance Inspector from the pocket of his shirt. This falsity of the defence is again to my mind a very heavy circumstance which goes against the innocence of the appellant.

In the light of the discussion above, this appeal fails and is dismissed in toto.