JUDGEMENT
Raveendran, J. -
(1.)This appeal by the accused is against the judgment dated 8-10-1999 of the Madras High Court in C.A. No. 627 of 1992, convicting him under Section 5(1)(d) read with Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 (for short the Act). By the said judgment, the High Court reversed the judgment dated 29-7-1991 passed by the Special Judge, Thanjavur District at Kumbakonam in Special Case No. 2/1988 acquitting the accused.
(2.)The case of the prosecution was as follows :
2. 1) The appellant was working as the Executive Officer of Sri Swarnathaneswar Temple, Chithaimoor, Tamil Nadu from September, 1985.
2. 2) That one Shivashanmugam (PW-1) was in occupation of six cents of temple land (situated behind his house). PW-1 approached the appellant in June, 1987 for securing a patta in his favour in respect of the said land. The appellant told him to apply to the concerned authorities, namely, the Deputy Commissioner and the Assistant Commissioner (Endowments) and that he would help him in securing the patta. On 2-7-1987, the appellant sent word to PW-1 to meet him. PW-1 along with his friend (PW-2) went and met the appellant. The appellant then demanded Rs. 450 to help PW-1. Subsequently, the appellant reduced the demand to Rs. 300 and enquired as to how much money he was having. PW-1 stated that he was having Rs.100/- and paid the said sum of Rs.100/- to the appellant. The appellant told PW 1 that only if he (PW-1) paid the balance amount, he would make arrangements for transfer of patta. He reiterated the demand on 9-7-1997 when PW-1 and PW-2 again met him and paid Rs. 250/- towards lease arrears due by PW-1.
2. 3) As PW-1 was not willing to pay the bribe, he gave a complaint (Ex. P-1) to the Inspector-Vigilance and Anti-Corruption, Thanjavoor (PW-13) on 10-7-1987. At that time, PW-2 accompanied PW-1. PW-13 prepared the FIR (Ex.P-20). Thereafter, PW-13 introduced the complainant to two witnesses, namely, Kulandaivelu (PW-3), an Engineer, and Santhanagopalan, a Clerk. PW-1 handed over Rs. 200/- (that in 4 currency notes of Rs. 50 each) to PW-13. Their numbers were noted and after explaining the procedure, the currency notes were coated with a chemical and returned to PW-1. Thereafter, PW-1, PW-2 and PW-3 were instructed as to how they should act when they went to meet the appellant.
2. 4) Thereafter, PW-1, PW-2, PW-3, PW-13, the Deputy Superintendent of Police and Santhanagopalan went to Chithamoor. They reached at about 8.15 p.m., parked the vehicles near the temple and P.Ws.1 to 3 were sent inside. PW- 1 and PW-2 went inside and PW-3 stood near the door. PW-1 stated that he had brought Rs. 200/- demanded by the appellant and gave the chemically treated currency notes to him. On receiving the same, the appellant stated that he has received PW-1s petition and he would finish the work. PW-2, who accompanied PW-1, also requested the appellant to do the needful. Then they came out and gave the agreed signal. The Inspector of Police and Deputy Superintendent of Police, who were standing outside came inside. On the appellant being identified by PW-1, he was asked whether he had received the amount. The appellant was holding the amount in his right hand, shifted it to his left hand and thereafter kept it on the table. Necessary chemical test was conducted and the amount was recovered. On query from the Inspector, the accused explained that PW-1 had paid the amount as due by Thyagarajan (PW-6) to the temple by way of lease arrears. Mahazar, sketch and search list were drawn up.
(3.)On behalf of the prosecution, 13 witnesses were examined in Ex. P-1 to P-21 marked, apart from MO 1 to 3. On behalf of the defence, DW-1 and DW-2 were examined and Ex. D-1 to D-10 were exhibited.