LexRAJ RAJENDRA SINGH SETH @ R.R.S. SETH versus THE STATE OF JHARKHAND AND ANR.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2008] 11 S.C.R. 66 A RAJ RAJENDRA SINGH SETH @ R.R.S. SETH v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND AND ANR. r (Criminal Appeal No.1135 of 2008) B JULY 22, 2008 [DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT AND S.H. KAPADIA, JJ.] . 1'-· Prevention of r:Jorruption Act, 194 7: s. 5(2) read with s. 5(1 )(d) - Conviction under, on the ground that doctor de- c manded bribe for giving proper medical treatment - Justifica- tion of - Held: Justified...,... Evidence establish that the doctor ' ;. asked money to be passed on to ward boy who in turn handed over money to doctor -All requisites for proving demand and acceptance of btibe established - Penal Code, 1860 - ss. D 1208 and 161. ' f- Prosecution case .was that father of PW-3-complain- 1- ~. ant was admitted in hospital where appellant was doctor :,.i_ an.d ac~used no.2· was ward boy. Father of PW-3 com- plained to him about lack of proper treatment. PW-3 re- E quested accused no.2 to allow him to meet appellant. PW- I. 3 met appellant who demanded Rs .. 500 from him for giv- ing proper treatment to his father and also insisted to pay the amount on 1.9.1985. The doctor also told PW-3-that in case he was not available in the hospital, he would pay ,__ ; F the am·ount to his ward boy,· who would pass the amount F to him. ;t.. PW-3 filed complaint. Trap was laid and on the day fixed for paying the bribe money, appellant and accused G no.2 were caught red handed. Special Judge held the appellant and accused no.2 guilty of offence punishable under ss. 1208 and 161 IPC and also under s.5(2) read with s.5(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947. >- 1- Each of them was sentenced to undergo rigorous impris- ... onment for one year and to pay fine. On appeal, High Court H 66 ,_ ~ RAJ RAJENDRA SINGH SETH @ R.R.S. SETH v. 67 THE STATE OF JHARKHAND & ANR. held that the accusations were established but consider· A ing passage of time reduced the sentence to the period already undergone. Hence the present appeal. Dismissing the appeal, the Court HELD: 1. The evidence is to the effect that the appel- B lant had asked PW-3 to pay money to co-accused who was to pass the money to him. PW-2 in his evidence has categorically stated that the decision was taken in CBI office that money is to be paid to accused no.2 who has made payment to the accused. Similarly, PW-10 while C making verification about the genuineness of the allega- tions made by PW-3 has stated that he went to the resi- dence of the appellant and he hid himself behind the bush and from there he heard talks between PW-3 and appel- lant. He has stated that the appellant asked PW-3 to make o payment to accused no.2. PW-3 corroborated this part of the statement of PW-10 who is a constable. He was en- trusted with the job to verify the genuineness of the alle- gations made by PW-3. He went to his Chamber and ac- cused no.2 was present there. PWs 1 and 2 were inde- E pendent witnesses and in their presence money was de- livered to accused no.2 by PW-3. This was done because when PW-3 and others reached the hospital, the cham- ber was found locked. PW-3 met accused no.2 and paid money to him and proceeded to residence of the appel- F lant. After reaching there PW-3 and accused no.2 went inside the gate and PW-2 and others remained at the gate. It is clear from the evidence that the appellant came out after the call bell was pressed and accused no.2 passed the money to him. PW-2 who saw passing of money to the appellant, gave a signal and immediately thereafter G accused no.2 and the appellant were arrested and money was recovered from the right hand of the appellant and both the hands of the accused persons were washed in separate solution and they turned pink. The currency notes were also recovered and the requisite formalities H 68 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2008] 11 S. C.R. A were followed. The plea that there is no demand made by the appellant is clearly belied by the evidence on record. The evidence clearly establishes that the appellant had asked the money to be passed on to accused no.2 who in turn handed over the money to the appellant. All the B requisites for proving the demand and acceptance of bribe have been established. [Paras 8, 10] [72-C,D,E,F,G,H; 73-A & B; 7 4-D] c D E B. Noha v, State of Kera/a and Anr. (2006) 12 SCC 277 - relied on. CRIMINALAPPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No. 1135 of .2008 From the Judgment and Order dated 10/9/2003 of the High Court
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.