KANNAN versus STATE REP. BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE

Citation: [2018] 11 S.C.R. 650 · Decided: 12-09-2018 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: R. BANUMATHI · Disposal: Dismissed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
650
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2018] 11 S.C.R.
KANNAN
v.
STATE REP. BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE
(Criminal Appeal No. 1580 of 2011)
SEPTEMBER 12, 2018
[R. BANUMATHI AND INDIRA BANERJEE, JJ.]
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 – ss.7 and 13(2) r/w.
s.13(1)(d) – Prosecution case was that Deputy Commercial Tax
Officer (PW-4) along with A-1, who was then working as Assistant
Commercial Tax Officer, inspected a grocery shop (owned by father
of PW-2) and seized the accounts book – PW-2 approached A-1 to
return the accounts book for which A-1 demanded bribe – PW-2
lodged a complaint before Anti-corruption wing – Trap was arranged
to catch the accused – Accordingly, PW-2 went to the office of A-1
where A-1 asked him whether he brought the money and when PW-
2 stated that he brought the money, A-1 asked PW-2 to pay the
money to A-2 and directed A-2 to receive the money – Trap team
took the sodium carbonate test, which led to arrest of A-1 and A-2
– Trial Court convicted both accused u/ss.7 and 13(1)(d) of the
Act, and sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two
years – However, High Court reduced the sentence to one year
imprisonment – On appeal, held: PW-2 clearly stated in his statement
about demand and acceptance of bribe amount by  A-1 and A-2 –
PW-3, the accompanying witness clearly supported prosecution case
– Furthermore, the evidence of PW-6, the office assistant, also
corroborated the version of PW-2 – Courts below, rightly found
accused guilty on basis of the evidence of PW-2 and test conducted
in the sodium carbonate solution.
Dismissing the appeals, the Court
HELD: 1. PW-2 clearly stated about the demand and
acceptance of the bribe amount by A-1 and A-2.  PW-3,
accompanying witness, though turned hostile, in his Chief-
Examination clearly stated that he accompanied PW-2 who went
and met A-1 and on the direction of A-1, PW-2 paid the money to
A-2.  To that extent, the evidence of PW-2 is corroborated by the
[2018] 11  S.C.R. 650
650
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
651
evidence of PW-3.  That apart, the evidence of PW-6, the office
assistant, also corroborates the version of PW-2.  In his evidence
PW-6 has stated that PW-2 went inside the room of A-1 and that
A-1 told A-2 that PW-2 would give money and that A-2 must take
and keep it with him.  Accordingly, PW-2 gave money to A-2 who
received the same.  Thus, the evidence of PW-2 is corroborated
by the evidence of PW-6, the Office Assistant.  Based on the
evidence of PW-2 and test conducted in the sodium carbonate
solution the Trial Court and the High Court had rightly found the
appellants-accused guilty of the offences.  There were no grounds
to take a different view.  [Paras 4 and 5][652-G; 653-A-C]
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal
No. 1580 of 2011
From the Judgment and Order dated 14.08.2008 of the High Court
of Madras at Madurai Bench in Criminal Appeal No. 875 of 2002
WITH
Criminal Appeal No. 1581 of 2011.
Ms. Malini Poduval, Ms. Babita Sant, P. B. Suresh, Vipin Nair,
Vikrant Yadav, Anshumaan Bahadur, Karthik Jayashankar, Advs. for
the appellant.
M. Yogesh Kanna, S. Partha Sarathi, Advs. for the respondent.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
R. BANUMATHI, J. 1. These appeals arise out of the conviction
of the appellants under Sections 7 and 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d)
of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and the appellants were
sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year.
2. A grocery shop under the name and style “Ambika Stores”
was run by father of Sabapathy-(PW-2).  On 19th October, 1994 Deputy
Commercial Tax Officer (PW-4) along with accused no.1, M. Nadimuthu,
who was then working as Assistant Commercial Tax Officer, inspected
the grocery shop and seized the accounts book.  Case of the prosecution
is that PW-2 approached A-1 and asked for return of accounts book for
which A-1 demanded bribe amount of Rs.2000/-.  On 22nd October,
1994, PW-2 gave an application for registration and produced a challan
for Rs.100/-.  On 22nd November, 1994 PW-2 again went to the Office
KANNAN v. STATE REP. BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
652
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2018] 11 S.C.R.
of the Deputy Commercial Tax Officers and asked A-1 to return of
accounts book on which A-1 is said to have reiterated the demand for
Rs.2000/-.  On 30th November, 1994, PW-2 again approached A-1 who
stated that the bribe amount of Rs.2000/- which was subsequently
reduced to Rs.800/-, to be paid on 1st November, 1994 failing which the
application f
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.