High Court Punjab-Haryana High Court

Raj Pal And Another vs State Of Punjab on 16 March, 2009

Punjab-Haryana High Court
Raj Pal And Another vs State Of Punjab on 16 March, 2009
            Criminal Appeal No.1398-SB of 2002.
                        -1-

In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh.

                         Criminal Appeal No.1398-SB of 2002.

                         Date of decision:16-3-2009.

Raj Pal and another.

                                                  ...Appellants.

            Versus

State of Punjab.

                                                  ...Respondent.

            ...

Coram;      Hon'ble Mr. Justice K. C. Puri.

            ...

Present:    Mr. Rajinder Goyal Advocate for the appellants.

            Mr. K.S. Pannu, AAG Punjab.

            ...

K. C. Puri, J.

Judgment.

The appellants were tried by Shri M.S.Chauhan, the

then Special Judge, Amritsar. Vide impugned judgment dated

5.9.2002, they were convicted under Sections 13(2), 7 and 8 of the

Prevention of Corruption Act,1988 (in short the Act) and 420

IPC. Vide separate order dated 5.9.2002, they were sentenced as
Criminal Appeal No.1398-SB of 2002.

-2-

under:-

Raj Pal, accused.

To undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and to

pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to

undergo further rigorous imprisonment for six months under

Section 7 of the Act.

To undergo further rigorous imprisonment for three

years and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/- under Section 13(2) of the

Act. In default of payment of fine, he has been ordered to undergo

further rigorous imprisonment for six months.

Under Section 420 IPC, he has been awarded one year

rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs.1,000/- and in default of

payment of fine, he has been ordered to undergo rigorous

imprisonment for three months.

Narinder Pal, accused.

Under Section 8 of the Act, he has been ordered to

undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of

Rs.1,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo further

rigorous imprisonment for six months.

Under Section 13(2) of the Act, he has been ordered to

undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of
Criminal Appeal No.1398-SB of 2002.

-3-

Rs.2000/-. In default of payment of fine, he has been ordered to

undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months.

He has been further ordered to undergo rigorous

imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- under

Section 420 IPC. In default of payment of fine, he has been

ordered to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for three

months.

All the substantive sentences have been ordered to run

concurrently.

The controversy lies within a very narrow scope and

following brief reference to the factual aspects would suffice:-

Gura Singh son of Nihal Singh, resident of village

Dhunda had a son named Swaran Singh who was killed by the

terrorists. His wife had also died. Swaran Singh left behind a son

and his parents namely Gura Singh, father and Dan Kaur, mother.

The aggrieved family received Rs.20,000/- in cash and Rs.30,000/-

in the shape of National Saving Certificates on account of relief

from the Government. However, pension in that respect was not

released in spite of number of rounds having been made by Gura

Singh. He ultimately got in touch with Raj Pal Clerk, in the office

of Sub Divisional Magistrate, Kadoor Sahib, who is an accused in
Criminal Appeal No.1398-SB of 2002.

-4-

this case. Said Raj Pal after going through the file of the case told

Gura Singh that their case was not properly framed as the Senior

Superintendent of Police had stated that Swaran Singh was killed

on account of some enmity. In these circumstances, the National

Saving Certificates and the cash amount of Rs.20,000/- was also to

be returned. He also told Gura Singh that he might also be involved

in a criminal case for having obtained the relief on false grounds.

Gura Singh pleaded before him to help him as his son Swaran

Singh was infact killed in terrorist action. Thereupon,accused Raj

Pal asked Gura Singh to return the National Saving Certificates

and only then he would do something in the matter.

Complainant Gura Singh got in touch with Gurdial

Singh PW on 8.7.1997 and along with him went to the office of the

Sub Divisional Magistrate, Khadoor Sahib. Both of them told Raj

Pal accused that the death of Swaran Singh was in a terrorist action

and pleaded before him to help the complainant by getting the

pension released. Raj Pal accused demanded Rs.10,000/- as illegal

gratification from him. Ultimately, deal was settled at Rs.8,000/-.

The accused also took National Saving Certificates of Rs.30,000/-

from the complainant. Raj Pal accused told the complainant to pay

Rs.8,000/- to his brother Narinder Pal, second accused who was
Criminal Appeal No.1398-SB of 2002.

-5-

running a shop at Fatehabad on 11.7.1997. It was also assured that

after the receipt of money, said Narinder Pal would return National

Saving Certificates to the complainant.

The complainant did not like the idea of getting pension

released in lieu of illegal gratification. Accordingly, he feigned that

he was not possessing sufficient money at that time. The

complainant and Gurdial Singh PW contacted Vigilance Bureau.

The statement of the complainant was recorded and on

its basis, the present case was got registered against the accused.

The complainant produced a sum of Rs.8,000/- in the

form of 16 currency notes in the denomination of Rs.500/- each

before the Investigating Officer. Their numbers were noted down

in a memo. After applying Phenol-phthalein ( in short “P”

Powder), the same were returned to the complainant.

After observing necessary formalities, a raiding party

was organized. Gura Singh and Gurdial Singh went to accused

Narinder Pal. After the money was passed on to accused Narinder

Pal by the complainant on his demand, Gurdial Singh gave a signal

to the police party. Randeep Singh, official witness was joined in

the raiding party. The accused was arrested and the bribe money

was recovered from his hand.

Criminal Appeal No.1398-SB of 2002.

-6-

A tumbler made of plain glass was requisitioned. Water

was put therein and then was put Sodium Carbonate but the colour

of the water did not change. Thereupon, accused Narinder Pal was

made to wash fingers of both his hands therein. Upon this, the

colour of Sodium Carbonate solution turned light pink.

Other steps in the investigation were taken and after

completion of same, the accused were challaned.

The accused were charge-sheeted accordingly to which

they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

In order to prove its case against the accused, the

prosecution examined PW-1 Harbhajan Singh, Clerk, PW-2 Jasbir

Singh, Postal Assistant, PW-3 Gura Singh complainant, PW-4

Gurdial Singh, shadow witness, PW-5 Angur Singh, Naib Sadar

Kanungo, PW-6 Randeep Singh, Clerk, PW-7 SP Mohinder Singh,

PW-8 Jugal Kishore, PW-9 HC Tarsem Singh, PW-10 Constable

Karam Singh.

In their statements recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C,

the accused denied the prosecution allegations appearing against

him. Accused Raj Pal has taken the following stand:-

“I am innocent. False case is made against me. Pension

was sanctioned in favour of Dann Kaur and was being
Criminal Appeal No.1398-SB of 2002.
-7-

regularly paid. Gurdial Singh PW was against me and I

never let the illegal work done. He used Gura Singh PW

to make false case against me. I never demanded any

money. Gurdial Singh has links with the people of

Vigilance Department.”

Accused Narinder Pal has come out with a plea that he

was a deed writer and an agent of the Post Office. Gurdial Singh

and Gura Singh came to his shop and handed over money to him

for the purposes of opening an account in the Post Office. National

Saving Certificates were in possession of Gurdial Singh and were

planted upon him.

In their defence, the accused examined DW-1 Pal

Singh.

After trial, the accused were convicted and sentenced,

as noticed earlier.

Feeling aggrieved against the said judgment, the

appellants have filed the instant appeal.

The learned counsel for the appellants has moved an

application under Section 391 read with Section 482 Cr.P.C for

permitting the appellants to lead additional evidence to prove

documents, Annexures A-1 to A-3. It is mentioned that appellant
Criminal Appeal No.1398-SB of 2002.

-8-

No.1 joined the service in the year 1988 in Goindwal Industrial

Investment Corporation but since the said Corporation was closed

he along with others were adjusted on different posts with the State

of Punjab. Ultimately, he joined service as a Clerk with the State of

Punjab on 15.4.1993. He was discharging his duty with due

diligence and with honesty. The appellants could not produce

documents Annexures A-1 to A-3 in the trial Court. These

documents prove the fact that the amount of pension was credited

to the account of Dan Kaur alias Dhan Kaur much prior to the raid

and as such there was no question of demanding illegal

gratification.

Notice of this application was given to the State which

has opposed the prayer.

The learned counsel for the appellants has submitted

that Annexure A-1 is the application dated 8.4.1997 filed by Dan

Kaur for opening an account in the Punjab & Sind Bank. Annexure

A-2 is the certificate of Oriental Bank of Commerce, Taran Taran

stating that cheque No.803734 dated 5.6.1997, has been credited to

her account on 7.6.1997. Annexure A-3 is the copy of ledger

showing that Rs.16,000/- were withdrawn on 7.6.1997 and the

remaining amount of Rs.1,700/- was withdrawn on 14.6.1997. On
Criminal Appeal No.1398-SB of 2002.

-9-

the strength of these documents, it is contended that since the

amount of pension was already credited to the account of Dan Kaur

so there was no question of demanding illegal gratification.

Therefore, the stand taken by the prosecution is belied by the

documentary evidence.

It is further contended that while appearing as a

prosecution witness, the complainant has stated that the amount of

illegal gratification was paid to Raj Pal, accused. He was declared

hostile. In the cross-examination by the Additional Public

Prosecutor, he has improved. The accused has stated that the

amount was paid to Narinder Pal. So, it is contended that the

prosecution has failed to prove demand, acceptance and recovery

of illegal gratification.

It is further contended that the case of the appellants is

clear. In fact, the complainant wanted to deposit the amount of

Rs.8,000/- in the account of Post Office. Narinder Pal, accused was

the agent of Post Office. The said amount was received by

Narinder Pal for depositing the same in the Post Office. The

witnesses of the prosecution have admitted the fact that Narinder

Pal accused was an agent of the Post Office and in spite of that, the

learned trial Court has held that no evidence has been produced by
Criminal Appeal No.1398-SB of 2002.

-10-

the accused that Narinder Pal was the agent of the Post Office.

Therefore, this fact clearly shows that the trial Court has not

applied its mind properly. It is further contended that no recovery

has been effected from Raj Pal who was a Government servant at

the relevant time. In these circumstances also, the case of the

prosecution is not proved.

It is further contended that there is no independent

corroboration of the demand and acceptance of illegal gratification.

The shadow witness is closely related to the complainant. So, his

testimony cannot be accepted. The counsel for the appellants has

relied upon the following authorities:-

(a) Union of India, Thr. Inspector, CBI Versus

Purnandu Biswas, 2005(4) R.C.R (Criminal) 517.

(b) Bir Singh and others v. The State of U.P, AIR

1978 Supreme Court 59.

           ©     Ganga Kumar Srivastava Verus The State of

           Bihar, 2005(6) J.T.356.

(d) Anand Parkash Versus State of Haryana, 2008

(2) R.C.R (Criminal) 335 and

(e) Zahira Habibula H. Sheikh and Anr. Versus

State of Gujarat and Ors., 2004 J.T.94.
Criminal Appeal No.1398-SB of 2002.

-11-

The learned State counsel has supported the judgment

of the trial Court and has opposed the prayer for additional

evidence. It is contended that the case of the prosecution is that the

complainant was put under the fear of registering a criminal case

against him for the purposes of extracting money from him. Raj

Pal accused further told the complainant that he was not only to

return the amount of Rs.20,000/- in cash and Rs.30,000/- in the

shape of National Saving Certificates but a criminal case would be

registered on the ground that his son was not killed in terrorist

activities. Under threat, Raj Pal accused directed the complainant

to pay the amount to Narinder Pal. The trial Court has held that

Narinder Pal is not an agent of the Post Office. The appellants have

moved an application for additional evidence but still they have not

produced any document on the file to show that Narinder Pal was

the agent of Post Office. So, that stand taken by the accused stands

belied. The prosecution has been able to prove the ingredients of

offences beyond any reasonable doubt, for which the accused have

been charged. It is further submitted that the authorities relied upon

by the counsel for the appellants are not applicable to the facts of

the present case. Therefore, a prayer has been made for the

dismissal of the appeal.

Criminal Appeal No.1398-SB of 2002.

-12-

I have given my careful consideration to the rival

submissions made by both sides and have gone through the record

of the case.

In this case, the case of the prosecution is that Swaran

Singh son of Gura Singh complainant was killed by the terrorists

and, on that count, the aggrieved family received Rs.20,000/- in

cash and Rs.30,000/- in the shape of National Saving Certificates,

as per policy of the Punjab Government. Gura Singh met Raj Pal,

accused for release of pension but he told Gura Singh that since

there was no report from the Senior Superintendent of Police that

Swaran Singh was killed in terrorist activities but there was report

of Senior Superintendent of Police that Swaran Singh was killed

due to enmity. So, in these circumstances, the complainant had to

return Rs.20,000/- in cash and Rs.30,000/- in the form of National

Saving Certificates. Raj Pal accused also told the complainant that

a criminal case would be registered against him and, on that count,

he demanded Rs.10,000/-. The deal was settled at Rs.8,000/-. Gura

Singh came in touch with Gurdial Singh who told the complainant

not to pay the bribe amount, as per agreement. The bribe amount

was to be paid to Narinder Pal, accused. A raid was conducted by

the Vigilance Department and Narinder Pal was caught red handed.

Criminal Appeal No.1398-SB of 2002.

-13-

The “P” Powder test proved positive. The learned trial Court after

appraisal of evidence on the file came to the conclusion that the

prosecution has been able to prove the ingredients of offence for

which the accused have been charged and consequently convicted

both the accused, as detailed above.

The main plank of arguments of counsel for the

appellants is that since the pension has already been credited to the

account of Dan Kaur much prior to the raid and that the amount of

pension had been withdrawn by her in the month of June, i.e. prior

to the raid, therefore, there was no motive for demanding the

amount.

The above-said contention raised by the counsel for the

appellants looks attractive but is without any legal force. The case

of the prosecution is that Raj Pal accused told Gura Singh

complainant that there was a report of the Senior Superintendent of

Police that Swaran Singh, his son was not killed in terrorist

activities and was murdered for personal enmity and, on that count,

the complainant party had to return Rs.20,000/- and NSC of

Rs.30,000/- and the complainant was also told that he will have to

face trial. The fact remains that according to the prosecution case,

the complainant was put in fear of criminal litigation. Moreover,
Criminal Appeal No.1398-SB of 2002.

-14-

pension is drawn monthly and the case of the prosecution is that

when he went to Raj Pal accused for allowing him pension, Raj Pal

demanded Rs.10,000/- and the matter was settled at Rs.8,000/-.

The said amount was to be paid to Narinder Pal, accused. The

National Saving Certificates were also taken into possession from

the complainant. Mere fact that the complainant has stated that the

amount was paid to Raj Pal, accused is not sufficient to discard

testimony of the complainant Gura Singh. He was got declared

hostile and he has supported the case of the prosecution on all the

material particulars. He was cross-examined at length but nothing

could be brought on the file to discard his sworn testimony. He is a

rustic villager. Gurdial Singh, shadow witness stood like a rock

while appearing in the witness-box. There was absolutely no

reason for the complainant and the shadow witness for falsely

implicating the accused. The amount of Rs.8,000/- along with

National Saving Certificates were recovered from Narinder Pal on

a raid. The stand taken by the accused that the said amount was

given to Narinder Pal for opening an account in the Post Office has

been negatived by the trial Court. One of the grounds for

discarding that story is that Narinder Pal has failed to prove the

fact that he was an agent of the Post Office. Admittedly, no
Criminal Appeal No.1398-SB of 2002.

-15-

document to prove the fact that Narinder Pal was an agent of the

Post Office has been produced in the trial Court. The appellants

have also filed an application under Section 391 Cr.P.C and while

filing that application, no document has been placed on the file that

Narinder Pal was the agent of the Post Office. The best evidence,

in this case, was the documents issued by the Post Office but the

same have not been produced in the trial Court and even in the

Appellate Court while moving an application under Section 391

Cr.P.C. So, the stand taken by the appellants to the effect that an

amount of Rs.8,000/- was accepted by Narinder Pal for depositing

the same in the Post office is only to avoid legal punishment.

So far as submission made by the counsel for the

appellants that there is no independent corroboration to the

testimony of the complainant is concerned, the same is without any

substance. Gurdial Singh, shadow witness who has no axe to grind

against the accused has supported the case of the prosecution.

So far as additional evidence is concerned, the same

will not improve the case of the appellants, in the instant case, as

discussed above. Even if all these documents are taken into

account, they will only prove the fact that Rs.18,000/- have been

credited to the account of Dan Kaur on 7.6.1997 and she has
Criminal Appeal No.1398-SB of 2002.

-16-

withdrawn the amount in the month of June,1997 but according to

the prosecution story, the complainant party was put in fear of

criminal litigation on the ground that there was report of Senior

Superintendent of police that Swaran Singh died due to personal

enmity and not on account of terrorist activities.

Authority in case Zahira Habibula H. Sheikh and

Anr. (supra) is not helpful to the appellants. In that case, it has

been held that where there is dishonest and faulty investigation and

star witnesses are threatened, in that case, additional evidence can

be allowed. There is no dispute with this proposition of law. In the

present case, it is no body’s case that no opportunity was afforded

to the defence. The evidence now sought to be produced was well

within the knowledge of the appellants. Otherwise also, as

discussed above, even if the entire evidence is taken into account,

in that case, the case of the appellants will not be improved by the

evidence sought to be produced. So, in these

circumstances,application for additional evidence stands dismissed.

Authority in case Purnandu Biswas (supra), is

distinguishable as in that case, demand of illegal gratification was

not held to be proved.

Authority in case Bir Singh (supra) lays down that it is
Criminal Appeal No.1398-SB of 2002.

-17-

the duty of the prosecution to examine all the independent

witnesses. In the present case, the prosecution has examined all the

material witnesses. So, the above-said authority does not advance

the case of the appellants, in any manner.

Authority in case Ganga Kumar Srivastava (supra), is

also distinguishable as in that case, currency notes were not treated

with Phenolphthalein Powder and the evidence was shaky.

Therefore, the said authority is not applicable to the facts of the

present case.

Authority in case Anand Parkash (supra), is also

distinguishable as, in the present case, demand and acceptance

stand established beyond reasonable doubt.

The learned counsel for the appellants has submitted

that PW-6 Randhir Singh, Clerk has stated in his cross-

examination that the amount was paid to Narinder Pal for

depositing in the Post Office and, on that count, the defence

version is proved.

I have carefully considered the said submission but do

not find any force in the same. The statement made by PW-6

Randhir Singh is against the record and as such cannot be given

much importance. The learned trial Court has rightly discarded his
Criminal Appeal No.1398-SB of 2002.

-18-

testimony in cross-examination.

The learned counsel for the appellants has further

contended that the punishment is harsh. The appellants have

undergone the agony of trial for a period of about 12 years. Raj

Pal has been dismissed from service. So, a prayer has been made

for reduction of sentence in case the Court is not inclined to accept

the prayer for acquittal.

I have carefully considered the said submission.

The occurrence relates to the year 1997. Raj Pal accused

is stated to have been dismissed from service. Since then, the

appellants are stated to have undergone mental agony. So, in these

circumstances, the sentence of Raj Pal, accused under Sections 7

and 13(2) of the Act stands reduced to one year. The sentence of

fine under Sections 7 and 13(2) of the Act and sentence of

imprisonment and fine under Section 420 IPC in respect of Raj Pal

accused stand maintained.

The sentence of Narinder Pal under Sections 8 and 13

(2) of the Act also stand reduced to rigorous imprisonment for one

year. His sentence of fine under Sections 8 and 13(2) of the Act

and sentence of imprisonment and fine under Section 420 IPC

recorded by the trial Court stand maintained.

Criminal Appeal No.1398-SB of 2002.

-19-

With the above modification, this appeal stands

dismissed.

A copy of this judgment be sent to the trial Court for

strict compliance.


March 16th ,2009.                          ( K. C. Puri   )
Jaggi                                           Judge