{"id":138390,"date":"2009-03-16T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-03-15T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/raj-pal-and-another-vs-state-of-punjab-on-16-march-2009"},"modified":"2017-08-22T19:55:04","modified_gmt":"2017-08-22T14:25:04","slug":"raj-pal-and-another-vs-state-of-punjab-on-16-march-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/raj-pal-and-another-vs-state-of-punjab-on-16-march-2009","title":{"rendered":"Raj Pal And Another vs State Of Punjab on 16 March, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court<\/div>\n
Raj Pal And Another vs State Of Punjab on 16 March, 2009<\/div>\n
            Criminal Appeal No.1398-SB of 2002.\n                        -1-\n\nIn the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh.\n\n                         Criminal Appeal No.1398-SB of 2002.\n\n                         Date of decision:16-3-2009.\n\nRaj Pal and another.\n\n                                                  ...Appellants.\n\n            Versus\n\nState of Punjab.\n\n                                                  ...Respondent.\n\n            ...\n\nCoram;      Hon'ble Mr. Justice K. C. Puri.\n\n            ...\n\nPresent:    Mr. Rajinder Goyal Advocate for the appellants.\n\n            Mr. K.S. Pannu, AAG Punjab.\n\n            ...\n\nK. C. Puri, J.\n<\/pre>\n
Judgment.\n<\/p>\n
            The appellants were tried by Shri M.S.Chauhan, the<\/p>\n
then Special Judge, Amritsar. Vide impugned judgment dated<\/p>\n
5.9.2002, they were convicted under Sections 13(2), 7 and 8 of the<\/p>\n
Prevention of Corruption Act,1988 (in short the Act) and 420<\/p>\n
IPC. Vide separate order dated 5.9.2002, they were sentenced as
\n            Criminal Appeal No.1398-SB of 2002.\n<\/p>\n
                       -2-<\/span><\/p>\n
under:-\n<\/p>\n
           Raj Pal, accused.\n<\/p>\n
           To undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and to<\/p>\n
pay a fine of Rs.1,000\/- and in default of payment of fine, to<\/p>\n
undergo further rigorous imprisonment for six months under<\/p>\n
Section 7 of the Act.\n<\/p>\n
           To undergo further rigorous imprisonment for three<\/p>\n
years and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000\/- under Section 13(2) of the<\/p>\n
Act. In default of payment of fine, he has been ordered to undergo<\/p>\n
further rigorous imprisonment for six months.<\/p>\n
           Under Section 420 IPC, he has been awarded one year<\/p>\n
rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs.1,000\/- and in default of<\/p>\n
payment of fine, he has been ordered to undergo rigorous<\/p>\n
imprisonment for three months.\n<\/p>\n
           Narinder Pal, accused.\n<\/p>\n
           Under Section 8 of the Act, he has been ordered to<\/p>\n
undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of<\/p>\n
Rs.1,000\/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo further<\/p>\n
rigorous imprisonment for six months.\n<\/p>\n
           Under Section 13(2) of the Act, he has been ordered to<\/p>\n
undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of
\n            Criminal Appeal No.1398-SB of 2002.\n<\/p>\n
                       -3-<\/span><\/p>\n
Rs.2000\/-. In default of payment of fine, he has been ordered to<\/p>\n
undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months.<\/p>\n
           He has been further ordered to undergo rigorous<\/p>\n
imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000\/- under<\/p>\n
Section 420 IPC. In default of payment of fine, he has been<\/p>\n
ordered to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for three<\/p>\n
months.\n<\/p>\n
           All the substantive sentences have been ordered to run<\/p>\n
concurrently.\n<\/p>\n
           The controversy lies within a very narrow scope and<\/p>\n
following brief reference to the factual aspects would suffice:-<\/p>\n
           Gura Singh son of Nihal Singh, resident of village<\/p>\n
Dhunda had a son named Swaran Singh who was killed by the<\/p>\n
terrorists. His wife had also died. Swaran Singh left behind a son<\/p>\n
and his parents namely Gura Singh, father and Dan Kaur, mother.<\/p>\n
The aggrieved family received Rs.20,000\/- in cash and Rs.30,000\/-<\/p>\n
in the shape of National Saving Certificates on account of relief<\/p>\n
from the Government. However, pension in that respect was not<\/p>\n
released in spite of number of rounds having been made by Gura<\/p>\n
Singh. He ultimately got in touch with Raj Pal Clerk, in the office<\/p>\n
of Sub Divisional Magistrate, Kadoor Sahib, who is an accused in
\n            Criminal Appeal No.1398-SB of 2002.\n<\/p>\n
                       -4-<\/span><\/p>\n
this case. Said Raj Pal after going through the file of the case told<\/p>\n
Gura Singh that their case was not properly framed as the Senior<\/p>\n
Superintendent of Police had stated that Swaran Singh was killed<\/p>\n
on account of some enmity. In these circumstances, the National<\/p>\n
Saving Certificates and the cash amount of Rs.20,000\/- was also to<\/p>\n
be returned. He also told Gura Singh that he might also be involved<\/p>\n
in a criminal case for having obtained the relief on false grounds.<\/p>\n
Gura Singh pleaded before him to help him as his son Swaran<\/p>\n
Singh was infact killed in terrorist action. Thereupon,accused Raj<\/p>\n
Pal asked Gura Singh to return the National Saving Certificates<\/p>\n
and only then he would do something in the matter.<\/p>\n
           Complainant Gura Singh got in touch with Gurdial<\/p>\n
Singh PW on 8.7.1997 and along with him went to the office of the<\/p>\n
Sub Divisional Magistrate, Khadoor Sahib. Both of them told Raj<\/p>\n
Pal accused that the death of Swaran Singh was in a terrorist action<\/p>\n
and pleaded before him to help the complainant by getting the<\/p>\n
pension released. Raj Pal accused demanded Rs.10,000\/- as illegal<\/p>\n
gratification from him. Ultimately, deal was settled at Rs.8,000\/-.<\/p>\n
The accused also took National Saving Certificates of Rs.30,000\/-<\/p>\n
from the complainant. Raj Pal accused told the complainant to pay<\/p>\n
Rs.8,000\/- to his brother Narinder Pal, second accused who was
\n            Criminal Appeal No.1398-SB of 2002.\n<\/p>\n
                       -5-<\/span><\/p>\n
running a shop at Fatehabad on 11.7.1997. It was also assured that<\/p>\n
after the receipt of money, said Narinder Pal would return National<\/p>\n
Saving Certificates to the complainant.\n<\/p>\n
           The complainant did not like the idea of getting pension<\/p>\n
released in lieu of illegal gratification. Accordingly, he feigned that<\/p>\n
he was not possessing sufficient money at that time. The<\/p>\n
complainant and Gurdial Singh PW contacted Vigilance Bureau.<\/p>\n
           The statement of the complainant was recorded and on<\/p>\n
its basis, the present case was got registered against the accused.<\/p>\n
           The complainant produced a sum of Rs.8,000\/- in the<\/p>\n
form of 16 currency notes in the denomination of Rs.500\/- each<\/p>\n
before the Investigating Officer. Their numbers were noted down<\/p>\n
in a memo. After applying Phenol-phthalein ( in short “P”<\/p>\n
Powder), the same were returned to the complainant.<\/p>\n
           After observing necessary formalities, a raiding party<\/p>\n
was organized. Gura Singh and Gurdial Singh went to accused<\/p>\n
Narinder Pal. After the money was passed on to accused Narinder<\/p>\n
Pal by the complainant on his demand, Gurdial Singh gave a signal<\/p>\n
to the police party. Randeep Singh, official witness was joined in<\/p>\n
the raiding party. The accused was arrested and the bribe money<\/p>\n
was recovered from his hand.\n<\/p>\n
            Criminal Appeal No.1398-SB of 2002.\n<\/p>\n
                       -6-<\/span><\/p>\n
           A tumbler made of plain glass was requisitioned. Water<\/p>\n
was put therein and then was put Sodium Carbonate but the colour<\/p>\n
of the water did not change. Thereupon, accused Narinder Pal was<\/p>\n
made to wash fingers of both his hands therein. Upon this, the<\/p>\n
colour of Sodium Carbonate solution turned light pink.<\/p>\n
           Other steps in the investigation were taken and after<\/p>\n
completion of same, the accused were challaned.<\/p>\n
           The accused were charge-sheeted accordingly to which<\/p>\n
they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.<\/p>\n
           In order to prove its case against the accused, the<\/p>\n
prosecution examined PW-1 Harbhajan Singh, Clerk, PW-2 Jasbir<\/p>\n
Singh, Postal Assistant, PW-3 Gura Singh complainant, PW-4<\/p>\n
Gurdial Singh, shadow witness, PW-5 Angur Singh, Naib Sadar<\/p>\n
Kanungo, PW-6 Randeep Singh, Clerk, PW-7 SP Mohinder Singh,<\/p>\n
PW-8 Jugal Kishore, PW-9 HC Tarsem Singh, PW-10 Constable<\/p>\n
Karam Singh.\n<\/p>\n
           In their statements recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C,<\/p>\n
the accused denied the prosecution allegations appearing against<\/p>\n
him. Accused Raj Pal has taken the following stand:-<\/p>\n
           “I am innocent. False case is made against me. Pension<\/p>\n
           was sanctioned in favour of Dann Kaur and was being
\n             Criminal Appeal No.1398-SB of 2002.
\n                        -7-<\/span><\/p>\n
           regularly paid. Gurdial Singh PW was against me and I<\/p>\n
           never let the illegal work done. He used Gura Singh PW<\/p>\n
           to make false case against me. I never demanded any<\/p>\n
           money. Gurdial Singh has links with the people of<\/p>\n
           Vigilance Department.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
           Accused Narinder Pal has come out with a plea that he<\/p>\n
was a deed writer and an agent of the Post Office. Gurdial Singh<\/p>\n
and Gura Singh came to his shop and handed over money to him<\/p>\n
for the purposes of opening an account in the Post Office. National<\/p>\n
Saving Certificates were in possession of Gurdial Singh and were<\/p>\n
planted upon him.\n<\/p>\n
           In their defence, the accused examined DW-1 Pal<\/p>\n
Singh.\n<\/p>\n
           After trial, the accused were convicted and sentenced,<\/p>\n
as noticed earlier.\n<\/p>\n
           Feeling aggrieved against the said judgment, the<\/p>\n
appellants have filed the instant appeal.\n<\/p>\n
           The learned counsel for the appellants has moved an<\/p>\n
application under Section 391 read with Section 482 Cr.P.C for<\/p>\n
permitting the appellants to lead additional evidence to prove<\/p>\n
documents, Annexures A-1 to A-3. It is mentioned that appellant
\n             Criminal Appeal No.1398-SB of 2002.\n<\/p>\n
                        -8-<\/span><\/p>\n
No.1 joined the service in the year 1988 in Goindwal Industrial<\/p>\n
Investment Corporation but since the said Corporation was closed<\/p>\n
he along with others were adjusted on different posts with the State<\/p>\n
of Punjab. Ultimately, he joined service as a Clerk with the State of<\/p>\n
Punjab on 15.4.1993. He was discharging his duty with due<\/p>\n
diligence and with honesty. The appellants could not produce<\/p>\n
documents Annexures A-1 to A-3 in the trial Court. These<\/p>\n
documents prove the fact that the amount of pension was credited<\/p>\n
to the account of Dan Kaur alias Dhan Kaur much prior to the raid<\/p>\n
and as such there was no question of demanding illegal<\/p>\n
gratification.\n<\/p>\n
            Notice of this application was given to the State which<\/p>\n
has opposed the prayer.\n<\/p>\n
            The learned counsel for the appellants has submitted<\/p>\n
that Annexure A-1 is the application dated 8.4.1997 filed by Dan<\/p>\n
Kaur for opening an account in the Punjab & Sind Bank. Annexure<\/p>\n
A-2 is the certificate of Oriental Bank of Commerce, Taran Taran<\/p>\n
stating that cheque No.803734 dated 5.6.1997, has been credited to<\/p>\n
her account on 7.6.1997. Annexure A-3 is the copy of ledger<\/p>\n
showing that Rs.16,000\/- were withdrawn on 7.6.1997 and the<\/p>\n
remaining amount of Rs.1,700\/- was withdrawn on 14.6.1997. On
\n             Criminal Appeal No.1398-SB of 2002.\n<\/p>\n
                        -9-<\/span><\/p>\n
the strength of these documents, it is contended that since the<\/p>\n
amount of pension was already credited to the account of Dan Kaur<\/p>\n
so there was no question of demanding illegal gratification.<\/p>\n
Therefore, the stand taken by the prosecution is belied by the<\/p>\n
documentary evidence.\n<\/p>\n
            It is further contended that while appearing as a<\/p>\n
prosecution witness, the complainant has stated that the amount of<\/p>\n
illegal gratification was paid to Raj Pal, accused. He was declared<\/p>\n
hostile. In the cross-examination by the Additional Public<\/p>\n
Prosecutor, he has improved. The accused has stated that the<\/p>\n
amount was paid to Narinder Pal. So, it is contended that the<\/p>\n
prosecution has failed to prove demand, acceptance and recovery<\/p>\n
of illegal gratification.\n<\/p>\n
            It is further contended that the case of the appellants is<\/p>\n
clear. In fact, the complainant wanted to deposit the amount of<\/p>\n
Rs.8,000\/- in the account of Post Office. Narinder Pal, accused was<\/p>\n
the agent of Post Office. The said amount was received by<\/p>\n
Narinder Pal for depositing the same in the Post Office. The<\/p>\n
witnesses of the prosecution have admitted the fact that Narinder<\/p>\n
Pal accused was an agent of the Post Office and in spite of that, the<\/p>\n
learned trial Court has held that no evidence has been produced by
\n            Criminal Appeal No.1398-SB of 2002.\n<\/p>\n
                       -10-<\/span><\/p>\n
the accused that Narinder Pal was the agent of the Post Office.<\/p>\n
Therefore, this fact clearly shows that the trial Court has not<\/p>\n
applied its mind properly. It is further contended that no recovery<\/p>\n
has been effected from Raj Pal who was a Government servant at<\/p>\n
the relevant time. In these circumstances also, the case of the<\/p>\n
prosecution is not proved.\n<\/p>\n
           It is further contended that there is no independent<\/p>\n
corroboration of the demand and acceptance of illegal gratification.<\/p>\n
The shadow witness is closely related to the complainant. So, his<\/p>\n
testimony cannot be accepted. The counsel for the appellants has<\/p>\n
relied upon the following authorities:-\n<\/p>\n
           (a)   Union of India, Thr. Inspector, CBI Versus<\/p>\n
           Purnandu Biswas, 2005(4) R.C.R (Criminal) 517.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
           (b)   Bir Singh and others v. The State of U.P, AIR<\/p>\n
           1978 Supreme Court 59.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
           \u00a9     Ganga Kumar Srivastava Verus The State of\n\n           Bihar, 2005(6) J.T.356.\n\n<\/pre>\n
           (d) Anand Parkash Versus State of Haryana, 2008<\/p>\n
           (2) R.C.R (Criminal) 335 and<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
           (e)   Zahira Habibula H. Sheikh and Anr. Versus<\/p>\n
           State of Gujarat and Ors., 2004 J.T.94.
\n            Criminal Appeal No.1398-SB of 2002.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\n                       -11-<\/span><\/p>\n
           The learned State counsel has supported the judgment<\/p>\n
of the trial Court and has opposed the prayer for additional<\/p>\n
evidence. It is contended that the case of the prosecution is that the<\/p>\n
complainant was put under the fear of registering a criminal case<\/p>\n
against him for the purposes of extracting money from him. Raj<\/p>\n
Pal accused further told the complainant that he was not only to<\/p>\n
return the amount of Rs.20,000\/- in cash and Rs.30,000\/- in the<\/p>\n
shape of National Saving Certificates but a criminal case would be<\/p>\n
registered on the ground that his son was not killed in terrorist<\/p>\n
activities. Under threat, Raj Pal accused directed the complainant<\/p>\n
to pay the amount to Narinder Pal. The trial Court has held that<\/p>\n
Narinder Pal is not an agent of the Post Office. The appellants have<\/p>\n
moved an application for additional evidence but still they have not<\/p>\n
produced any document on the file to show that Narinder Pal was<\/p>\n
the agent of Post Office. So, that stand taken by the accused stands<\/p>\n
belied. The prosecution has been able to prove the ingredients of<\/p>\n
offences beyond any reasonable doubt, for which the accused have<\/p>\n
been charged. It is further submitted that the authorities relied upon<\/p>\n
by the counsel for the appellants are not applicable to the facts of<\/p>\n
the present case. Therefore, a prayer has been made for the<\/p>\n
dismissal of the appeal.\n<\/p>\n
            Criminal Appeal No.1398-SB of 2002.\n<\/p>\n
                       -12-<\/span><\/p>\n
           I have given my careful consideration to the rival<\/p>\n
submissions made by both sides and have gone through the record<\/p>\n
of the case.\n<\/p>\n
           In this case, the case of the prosecution is that Swaran<\/p>\n
Singh son of Gura Singh complainant was killed by the terrorists<\/p>\n
and, on that count, the aggrieved family received Rs.20,000\/- in<\/p>\n
cash and Rs.30,000\/- in the shape of National Saving Certificates,<\/p>\n
as per policy of the Punjab Government. Gura Singh met Raj Pal,<\/p>\n
accused for release of pension but he told Gura Singh that since<\/p>\n
there was no report from the Senior Superintendent of Police that<\/p>\n
Swaran Singh was killed in terrorist activities but there was report<\/p>\n
of Senior Superintendent of Police that Swaran Singh was killed<\/p>\n
due to enmity. So, in these circumstances, the complainant had to<\/p>\n
return Rs.20,000\/- in cash and Rs.30,000\/- in the form of National<\/p>\n
Saving Certificates. Raj Pal accused also told the complainant that<\/p>\n
a criminal case would be registered against him and, on that count,<\/p>\n
he demanded Rs.10,000\/-. The deal was settled at Rs.8,000\/-. Gura<\/p>\n
Singh came in touch with Gurdial Singh who told the complainant<\/p>\n
not to pay the bribe amount, as per agreement. The bribe amount<\/p>\n
was to be paid to Narinder Pal, accused. A raid was conducted by<\/p>\n
the Vigilance Department and Narinder Pal was caught red handed.\n<\/p>\n
            Criminal Appeal No.1398-SB of 2002.\n<\/p>\n
                       -13-<\/span><\/p>\n
The “P” Powder test proved positive. The learned trial Court after<\/p>\n
appraisal of evidence on the file came to the conclusion that the<\/p>\n
prosecution has been able to prove the ingredients of offence for<\/p>\n
which the accused have been charged and consequently convicted<\/p>\n
both the accused, as detailed above.\n<\/p>\n
           The main plank of arguments of counsel for the<\/p>\n
appellants is that since the pension has already been credited to the<\/p>\n
account of Dan Kaur much prior to the raid and that the amount of<\/p>\n
pension had been withdrawn by her in the month of June, i.e. prior<\/p>\n
to the raid, therefore, there was no motive for demanding the<\/p>\n
amount.\n<\/p>\n
           The above-said contention raised by the counsel for the<\/p>\n
appellants looks attractive but is without any legal force. The case<\/p>\n
of the prosecution is that Raj Pal accused told Gura Singh<\/p>\n
complainant that there was a report of the Senior Superintendent of<\/p>\n
Police that Swaran Singh, his son was not killed in terrorist<\/p>\n
activities and was murdered for personal enmity and, on that count,<\/p>\n
the complainant party had to return Rs.20,000\/- and NSC of<\/p>\n
Rs.30,000\/- and the complainant was also told that he will have to<\/p>\n
face trial. The fact remains that according to the prosecution case,<\/p>\n
the complainant was put in fear of criminal litigation. Moreover,
\n            Criminal Appeal No.1398-SB of 2002.\n<\/p>\n
                       -14-<\/span><\/p>\n
pension is drawn monthly and the case of the prosecution is that<\/p>\n
when he went to Raj Pal accused for allowing him pension, Raj Pal<\/p>\n
demanded Rs.10,000\/- and the matter was settled at Rs.8,000\/-.<\/p>\n
The said amount was to be paid to Narinder Pal, accused. The<\/p>\n
National Saving Certificates were also taken into possession from<\/p>\n
the complainant. Mere fact that the complainant has stated that the<\/p>\n
amount was paid to Raj Pal, accused is not sufficient to discard<\/p>\n
testimony of the complainant Gura Singh. He was got declared<\/p>\n
hostile and he has supported the case of the prosecution on all the<\/p>\n
material particulars. He was cross-examined at length but nothing<\/p>\n
could be brought on the file to discard his sworn testimony. He is a<\/p>\n
rustic villager. Gurdial Singh, shadow witness stood like a rock<\/p>\n
while appearing in the witness-box. There was absolutely no<\/p>\n
reason for the complainant and the shadow witness for falsely<\/p>\n
implicating the accused. The amount of Rs.8,000\/- along with<\/p>\n
National Saving Certificates were recovered from Narinder Pal on<\/p>\n
a raid. The stand taken by the accused that the said amount was<\/p>\n
given to Narinder Pal for opening an account in the Post Office has<\/p>\n
been negatived by the trial Court. One of the grounds for<\/p>\n
discarding that story is that Narinder Pal has failed to prove the<\/p>\n
fact that he was an agent of the Post Office. Admittedly, no
\n            Criminal Appeal No.1398-SB of 2002.\n<\/p>\n
                       -15-<\/span><\/p>\n
document to prove the fact that Narinder Pal was an agent of the<\/p>\n
Post Office has been produced in the trial Court. The appellants<\/p>\n
have also filed an application under Section 391 Cr.P.C and while<\/p>\n
filing that application, no document has been placed on the file that<\/p>\n
Narinder Pal was the agent of the Post Office. The best evidence,<\/p>\n
in this case, was the documents issued by the Post Office but the<\/p>\n
same have not been produced in the trial Court and even in the<\/p>\n
Appellate Court while moving an application under Section 391<\/p>\n
Cr.P.C. So, the stand taken by the appellants to the effect that an<\/p>\n
amount of Rs.8,000\/- was accepted by Narinder Pal for depositing<\/p>\n
the same in the Post office is only to avoid legal punishment.<\/p>\n
           So far as      submission made by the counsel for the<\/p>\n
appellants that there is no independent corroboration to the<\/p>\n
testimony of the complainant is concerned, the same is without any<\/p>\n
substance. Gurdial Singh, shadow witness who has no axe to grind<\/p>\n
against the accused has supported the case of the prosecution.<\/p>\n
           So far as additional evidence is concerned, the same<\/p>\n
will not improve the case of the appellants, in the instant case, as<\/p>\n
discussed above. Even if all these documents are taken into<\/p>\n
account, they will only prove the fact that Rs.18,000\/- have been<\/p>\n
credited to the account of Dan Kaur on 7.6.1997 and she has
\n            Criminal Appeal No.1398-SB of 2002.\n<\/p>\n
                       -16-<\/span><\/p>\n
withdrawn the amount in the month of June,1997 but according to<\/p>\n
the prosecution story, the complainant party was put in fear of<\/p>\n
criminal litigation on the ground that there was report of Senior<\/p>\n
Superintendent of police that Swaran Singh died due to personal<\/p>\n
enmity and not on account of terrorist activities.<\/p>\n
           Authority in case Zahira Habibula H. Sheikh and<\/p>\n
Anr. (supra) is not helpful to the appellants. In that case, it has<\/p>\n
been held that where there is dishonest and faulty investigation and<\/p>\n
star witnesses are threatened, in that case, additional evidence can<\/p>\n
be allowed. There is no dispute with this proposition of law. In the<\/p>\n
present case, it is no body’s case that no opportunity was afforded<\/p>\n
to the defence. The evidence now sought to be produced was well<\/p>\n
within the knowledge of the appellants. Otherwise also, as<\/p>\n
discussed above, even if the entire evidence is taken into account,<\/p>\n
in that case, the case of the appellants will not be improved by the<\/p>\n
evidence     sought      to     be      produced.    So,   in   these<\/p>\n
circumstances,application for additional evidence stands dismissed.<\/p>\n
           Authority in case Purnandu Biswas (supra), is<\/p>\n
distinguishable as in that case, demand of illegal gratification was<\/p>\n
not held to be proved.\n<\/p>\n
           Authority in case Bir Singh (supra) lays down that it is
\n            Criminal Appeal No.1398-SB of 2002.\n<\/p>\n
                       -17-<\/span><\/p>\n
the duty of the prosecution to examine all the independent<\/p>\n
witnesses. In the present case, the prosecution has examined all the<\/p>\n
material witnesses. So, the above-said authority does not advance<\/p>\n
the case of the appellants, in any manner.\n<\/p>\n
           Authority in case Ganga Kumar Srivastava (supra), is<\/p>\n
also distinguishable as in that case, currency notes were not treated<\/p>\n
with Phenolphthalein Powder and the evidence was shaky.<\/p>\n
Therefore, the said authority is not applicable to the facts of the<\/p>\n
present case.\n<\/p>\n
           Authority in case Anand Parkash (supra), is also<\/p>\n
distinguishable as, in the present case, demand and acceptance<\/p>\n
stand established beyond reasonable doubt.<\/p>\n
           The learned counsel for the appellants has submitted<\/p>\n
that PW-6 Randhir Singh, Clerk has stated in his cross-<\/p>\n
examination that the amount was paid to Narinder Pal for<\/p>\n
depositing in the Post Office and, on that count, the defence<\/p>\n
version is proved.\n<\/p>\n
           I have carefully considered the said submission but do<\/p>\n
not find any force in the same. The statement made by PW-6<\/p>\n
Randhir Singh is against the record and as such cannot be given<\/p>\n
much importance. The learned trial Court has rightly discarded his
\n            Criminal Appeal No.1398-SB of 2002.\n<\/p>\n
                       -18-<\/span><\/p>\n
testimony in cross-examination.\n<\/p>\n
           The learned counsel for the appellants has further<\/p>\n
contended that the punishment is harsh. The appellants have<\/p>\n
undergone the agony of trial for a period of about 12 years. Raj<\/p>\n
Pal has been dismissed from service. So, a prayer has been made<\/p>\n
for reduction of sentence in case the Court is not inclined to accept<\/p>\n
the prayer for acquittal.\n<\/p>\n
           I have carefully considered the said submission.<\/p>\n
           The occurrence relates to the year 1997. Raj Pal accused<\/p>\n
is stated to have been dismissed from service. Since then, the<\/p>\n
appellants are stated to have undergone mental agony. So, in these<\/p>\n
circumstances, the sentence of Raj Pal, accused under Sections 7<\/p>\n
and 13(2) of the Act stands reduced to one year. The sentence of<\/p>\n
fine under Sections 7 and 13(2) of the Act and sentence of<\/p>\n
imprisonment and fine under Section 420 IPC in respect of Raj Pal<\/p>\n
accused stand maintained.\n<\/p>\n
           The sentence of Narinder Pal under Sections 8 and 13<\/p>\n
(2) of the Act also stand reduced to rigorous imprisonment for one<\/p>\n
year. His sentence of fine under Sections 8 and 13(2) of the Act<\/p>\n
and sentence of imprisonment and fine under Section 420 IPC<\/p>\n
recorded by the trial Court stand maintained.\n<\/p>\n
              Criminal Appeal No.1398-SB of 2002.\n<\/p>\n
                         -19-<\/span><\/p>\n
             With the above modification, this appeal stands<\/p>\n
dismissed.\n<\/p>\n
             A copy of this judgment be sent to the trial Court for<\/p>\n
strict compliance.<\/p>\n
\n\nMarch 16th ,2009.                          ( K. C. Puri   )\nJaggi                                           Judge\n <\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
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. […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,28],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-138390","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-punjab-haryana-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nRaj Pal And Another vs State Of Punjab on 16 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/raj-pal-and-another-vs-state-of-punjab-on-16-march-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Raj Pal And Another vs State Of Punjab on 16 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/raj-pal-and-another-vs-state-of-punjab-on-16-march-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2009-03-15T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-08-22T14:25:04+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"19 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/raj-pal-and-another-vs-state-of-punjab-on-16-march-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/raj-pal-and-another-vs-state-of-punjab-on-16-march-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Raj Pal And Another vs State Of Punjab on 16 March, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-03-15T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-08-22T14:25:04+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/raj-pal-and-another-vs-state-of-punjab-on-16-march-2009\"},\"wordCount\":3698,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Punjab-Haryana High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/raj-pal-and-another-vs-state-of-punjab-on-16-march-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/raj-pal-and-another-vs-state-of-punjab-on-16-march-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/raj-pal-and-another-vs-state-of-punjab-on-16-march-2009\",\"name\":\"Raj Pal And Another vs State Of Punjab on 16 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-03-15T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-08-22T14:25:04+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/raj-pal-and-another-vs-state-of-punjab-on-16-march-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/raj-pal-and-another-vs-state-of-punjab-on-16-march-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/raj-pal-and-another-vs-state-of-punjab-on-16-march-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Raj Pal And Another vs State Of Punjab on 16 March, 2009\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\",\"https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Raj Pal And Another vs State Of Punjab on 16 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/raj-pal-and-another-vs-state-of-punjab-on-16-march-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Raj Pal And Another vs State Of Punjab on 16 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/raj-pal-and-another-vs-state-of-punjab-on-16-march-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-03-15T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-08-22T14:25:04+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"19 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/raj-pal-and-another-vs-state-of-punjab-on-16-march-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/raj-pal-and-another-vs-state-of-punjab-on-16-march-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Raj Pal And Another vs State Of Punjab on 16 March, 2009","datePublished":"2009-03-15T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-08-22T14:25:04+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/raj-pal-and-another-vs-state-of-punjab-on-16-march-2009"},"wordCount":3698,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Punjab-Haryana High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/raj-pal-and-another-vs-state-of-punjab-on-16-march-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/raj-pal-and-another-vs-state-of-punjab-on-16-march-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/raj-pal-and-another-vs-state-of-punjab-on-16-march-2009","name":"Raj Pal And Another vs State Of Punjab on 16 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-03-15T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-08-22T14:25:04+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/raj-pal-and-another-vs-state-of-punjab-on-16-march-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/raj-pal-and-another-vs-state-of-punjab-on-16-march-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/raj-pal-and-another-vs-state-of-punjab-on-16-march-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Raj Pal And Another vs State Of Punjab on 16 March, 2009"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/138390","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=138390"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/138390\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=138390"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=138390"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=138390"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}