- (1.)Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment dated 29th March, 2004 and order on sentence dated 2nd April, 2004 arising out of CC No. 13/1999 in case FIR 3/94 PS Anti-Corruption Branch whereby the appellant was convicted for offences punishable under Section 7 and 13(2) r/w Section 13(1) (d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and also to pay fine of Rs.500/-, in default of payment to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for three months on each count for his convictions under Section 7 & 13 (1) (d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1998.
(2.)Prosecution case, in brief, is that the appellant was employed in Delhi Electricity Supply Undertaking (DESU) in February 1994 and was posted at DESU Office in Keshav Puram those days. On 3rd February, 1994, at about 10:00 a.m. one Hari Chand went to the Anti-Corruption Branch office and lodged a complaint against the accused, inter alia, alleging that on receipt of excess electricity bill in respect of his residential house in Hansapuri Road, Trinagar, Delhi, he had contacted the accused on 1st February, 1994. The accused had asked him to come on 2nd February, 1994 and on 2nd February, 1994, when he contacted the accused, he demanded Rs.300/- as bribe for rectifying his electricity bill and also told the complainant that in case he wanted to get his bill rectified, he will have to pay Rs.300/- otherwise he should deposit the bill amount which, as per the complainant, was Rs.791/-. At that time, the complainant expressed his readiness to give that much money to the accused. However, he was not willing to pay any bribe to the accused. As such, he requested for taking necessary action against the accused.
(3.)In view of the allegations of demand of bribe by a public servant made by the complainant in his aforesaid complaint, the officials of Anti-Corruption Branch decided to lay a trap for apprehending the accused red handed while accepting bribe. One government servant was associated for the trap to act as a panch witness. The complainant produced two currency notes of Rs.100/-. It was explained to the complainant and the panch witness as to how the accused was going to be trapped. The currency notes produced by the complainant were treated with phenolphthalein powder and a solution of sodium carbonate was also prepared. It was explained to them that if anybody touches the phenolphthalein treated notes and then fingers of that person are dipped in colourless solution of sodium carbonate that solution would turn pink. Raid officer then gave practical demonstration also and thereafter that solution was thrown away and those notes were returned back to the complainant for being used as bribe money for the trap. Necessary instructions were imparted to the complainant and the panch witness for being followed by them during the trap. The complainant was told to keep the panch witness close to himself at the time of trap so that panch witness could hear his talks with the accused and also see the transaction of acceptance of bribe money by the accused and the panch witness was directed to give a signal to the raiding party by moving his hand over his head on being satisfied that the accused had accepted the money from the complainant as bribe.