JUDGMENT T.P.S. Mann. J.:- The appellant, who was posted as a Head Constable in C.I.A. Staff, Jalandhar, was tried by learned Special Judge, Jalandhar for an offence punishable under Section 13(2) read with Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act. Vide judgment and order dated 12.8.2005, the trial Court convicted him on both the counts and sentenced him to undergo RI for three years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- on each count. In default of payment of fine on each count, he was directed to undergo further RI for two months. Substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently. Aggrieved of the same, the appellant has filed the present appeal. 2. The case was registered on the basis of a statement made by complainant Deepak Kumar, wherein he stated that he had been doing the business of sale of lottery under the name and style of Bhole Shanker Lottery Stall. He had employed 8/9 workers to help him in his business, which was being carried on near Rama Mandi Chowk, Jalandhar. The appellant and other police officials had been demanding money from him but he never paid any amount to them. His two workers, Ravi Kumar and Gurdip Singh, were apprehended by C.I.A. Staff, Jalandhar on 8.11.2000 and were thereafter released on bail after the case was registered against them. The complainant, along with Ravi Kumar, then went to C.I.A. Staff, Jalandhar seeking return of his diary containing the account of lottery which was seized from them. At that point, the appellant assured to return the diary, besides treating those accused with leniency in case a sum of Rs. 3,000/- was paid to him as bribe. The deal was finally settled at Rs. 2,500/-. On the following day, i.e., 9.11.2000, Deepak Kumar complainant along with Ravi Kumar went to the office of Vigilance Bureau and made a statement Ex. PJ stating therein the aforementioned facts and also the fact that he did not want to get his work done by paying the bribe but was being forced to do the same. The complainant handed over five currency notes of the denomination of Rs. 500/- each to DSP Vipan Chaudhary, who noted the numbers of those notes on a memo Ex. PK. Demonstration on the effect of phenolphthalein when coming in contact with solution containing water and sodium carbonate was given to the complainant and Ravi Kumar. The complainant handed over five currency notes of the denomination of Rs. 500/- each to DSP Vipan Chaudhary, who noted the numbers of those notes on a memo Ex. PK. Demonstration on the effect of phenolphthalein when coming in contact with solution containing water and sodium carbonate was given to the complainant and Ravi Kumar. The currency notes were then returned to the complainant after being treated with phenolphthalein powder. The complainant was directed to hand over the tainted currency notes to the accused on demand. Ravi Kumar was directed to act as a shadow witness for listening and watching the proceedings between the accused and the complainant and then to give signal after the acceptance money by the accused. Sat Pal, SDE, Punjab Urban Development Authority (for short ‘PUDA’) and Piara Lal, Junior Assistant, PUDA were joined in the raiding party, which then proceeded to Police Station, Division No.2, Jalandhar. The complainant and Ravi Kumar went inside to meet the accused and to pay the tainted currency notes on his demand. After a signal was received from the shadow witness, the raiding party moved in and the accused was apprehended. His arms were secured. The hands of the accused were washed in a glass containing water and sodium carbonate. The colour thereof turned into light pink. On the search of the accused conducted by Sat Pal, SDE, the tainted currency notes were recovered from the right side pocket of his pant. The number of the currency notes tallied with those mentioned in memo Ex. PK. The pocket of the pant worn by the accused was also washed in a solution of water and sodium carbonate. The colour again turned into pink. Recovery memos of hand wash, pocket wash, besides that of the articles recovered on the personal search of the accused were prepared and so also the rough site plan of the place of occurrence. 3. After the completion of the investigation, challan was presented and the charges framed. The accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. 4. In support of its case the prosecution examined C. Varinder Kumar as PW1, who tendered into evidence his affidavit Ex. P A. SI. Darshan Singh PW2 proved sanction order Ex. PB given by Senior Superintendent of Police, Jalandhar for the prosecution of the accused. The accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. 4. In support of its case the prosecution examined C. Varinder Kumar as PW1, who tendered into evidence his affidavit Ex. P A. SI. Darshan Singh PW2 proved sanction order Ex. PB given by Senior Superintendent of Police, Jalandhar for the prosecution of the accused. C. Balwinder Singh PW3 stated about the deposit of two sealed nip parcels given to him by MHC Varinder Kumar on 23.11.2000 with Forensic Science Laboratory, Chandigarh. C. Prem Pal, PW4 proved attested copies of character rolls of the accused Ex. PC/1 to EX.PC/6. Sat Pal, SDE, PUDA, PW5 deposed about joining the raiding party on 9.11.2000. According to him, once the signal was received, the raiding party went to the courtyard of the Police Station, where the accused took out the currency notes from his pocket and threw them on the ground. He admitted that the hands of the accused were washed in the solution of chemical and water and the colour thereof turned into pink. Piara Lal, Junior Assistant, PUDA, appeared as PW6, who did not support the prosecution version. He was declared hostile and then cross-examined by Additional Public Prosecutor. Amrik Singh, Superintendent of Police PW7 deposed about the investigation of the case and preparation of the final report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. Deepak Kumar complainant, PW8, deposed about the factum of demand of bribe by the accused on 8.11.2000 as well as on 9.11.2000 and thereafter handing over the tainted currency notes to the accused. Ravi Kumar PW9, who was the shadow witness in the case, resiled from his earlier version and was declared hostile. DSP Vipan Chaudhary PW10 stated about the details of the raid conducted by him leading to the apprehension of the accused and thereafter the recovery of tainted currency notes from the pocket of the accused. HC Malkiat Rai PW 11 proved the recovery of diary from the accused, which was taken into possession vide memo Ex. PH. 5. When the accused was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C., he denied all the incriminating circumstances , appearing against him and pleaded false implication. He stated that he along with HC Harvinder Singh was secured by Vipan Chaudhary from in front of the main gate of C.I.A. Staff, Jalandhar and then taken to the office of Vigilance Bureau, where he was falsely implicated. 6. He stated that he along with HC Harvinder Singh was secured by Vipan Chaudhary from in front of the main gate of C.I.A. Staff, Jalandhar and then taken to the office of Vigilance Bureau, where he was falsely implicated. 6. The accused examined HC Balbir Singh DW1, who stated that no diary was recovered by him from Deepak Kumar when FIR Ex. D2 under Section 13-A of the Gambling Act was registered against him. ASI Jugal Kishore also deposed similarly that the diary in question was not recovered from Ravi Kumar, Gurdip Singh and Deepak Kumar. HC Harvinder Singh DW3 stated that Gurdip Singh was arrested under the Gambling Act but no diary was recovered from him. Further that when he himself along with the appellant was picked up by the vigilance team, nothing was recovered from the appellant on his personal search. 7. After going through the evidence, the trial Court held that the appellant misused his position to the utmost in tampering with the prosecution evidence. However, the credibility of complainant Deepak Kumar and Sat Pal, SDE could not be completely shaken. Besides, presumption under Section 20 of the Prevention of Corruption Act could be legitimately drawn from the recovery of the tainted currency notes from the appellant that it was he who first demanded and then accepted the illegal gratification from the complainant. The appellant was, accordingly, held guilty for the two offences and sentenced. 8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and minutely perused the evidence available on the file. 9. Deepak Kumar complainant, who appeared as PW8, supported the case of the prosecution uptil the point of demand of bribe by the appellant on 9.11.2000. He stated that his workers, Ravi Kumar and Gurdip Singh, were arrested on 8.11.2000 under the Gambling Act and released on bail by C.I.A. Staff, Jalandhar. The diary in which the record of lotteries was kept, was retained by the police. When he met the appellant, who was at that time posted in C.I.A. Staff, Jalandhar, in order to get back the diary, he demanded a sum of Rs.3,000/- from him for the said purpose. The complainant told the appellant that he would pay the amount next day and then take back the diary from him. The deal was struck for Rs.2,500/-. The complainant told the appellant that he would pay the amount next day and then take back the diary from him. The deal was struck for Rs.2,500/-. On 9.11.2000, the complainant went to the office of Vigilance Bureau, Jalandhar and apprised the officials that he was not willing to pay Rs. 2,5001- to the appellant as illegal gratification. He made the statement Ex. PJ before DSP Vipan Chaudhary and also handed over currency notes worth Rs.2,500/- in the denomination of Rs. 500/-. Demonstration was made before him about the action of phenolphthalein when coming in : contact with solution of water and sodium carbonate. The complainant along with Ravi Kumar then went to the appellant, who was present in his office. They were accompanied by Sat Pal and another, besides DSP Vipan Chaudhary. When the complainant and Ravi Kumar met the appellant, he asked from the complainant as to whether he had brought the demanded money to which he replied in the positive. Up to this point, Deepak Kumar PW8 corroborated the prosecution version. Then he stated about shaking hands with the accused. When he handed over the currency notes to him, the same fell on the ground. As the witness was found suppressing the truth, he was allowed to be cross­ examined by learned Additional Public Prosecutor. During such cross-examination, he admitted it as correct that the accused had taken the money from him and put it in right side pocket of his pant. He also admitted that in the meanwhile, the raiding party reached the spot and the accused was apprehended. The hands of the accused were secured. When the hands of the accused were dipped in the solution, its colour turned to pink. This witness, however, did not support the prosecution case regarding pocket wash. However, he stated that the number of the currency notes were tallied, which were the same as given by him to the accused. Those currency notes were taken into possession vide memo Ex. PO, which was attested by him, besides Ravi Kumar, Sat Pal and Piara Lal. When this witness was cross­ examined by the defence, he deposed that the currency notes were not kept by the accused in the pocket of his pant but they were scattered on the floor. 10. Those currency notes were taken into possession vide memo Ex. PO, which was attested by him, besides Ravi Kumar, Sat Pal and Piara Lal. When this witness was cross­ examined by the defence, he deposed that the currency notes were not kept by the accused in the pocket of his pant but they were scattered on the floor. 10. A bare look at the testimony of Deepak Kumar PW8 would show that although he has made an attempt to help the accused yet, he corroborated the prosecution case almost in its entirety. He did state about the demand of the bribe by the appellant, first on 8.11.2000 and thereafter on 9.11.2000. However he tried to explain the solution of water and sodium carbonate turning into pink when the hands of the accused were dipped in the same by saying that he himself shook hands with the accused first. During his cross­ examination by the prosecution, he admitted it to be a fact that the accused had taken the money from him and put the same in the pocket of his pant. In such a situation, there was no question of the currency notes falling on the ground and scattering. There was a demand made by the appellant from the complainant on 9.11.2000 as to whether he had brought the money or not. When the complainant replied in the positive and handed over the same, the accused received it and put it in the pocket of his pant. In view of the same, it cannot be held that the tainted money was not accepted by the accused but fell on the ground. The fact of recovery of the tainted money from the pocket of the accused is also proved from the recovery memo Ex. PE, which was signed by Deepak Kumar complainant. It is stated therein that the five currency notes of the denomination of Rs. 500/- each were recovered from the right pocket of the pant worn by HC Kulwinder Singh. The said recovery memo was admitted by Deepak Kumar by saying that besides him, it was attested by Ravi Kumar, Sat Pal and Piara Lal. It may be mentioned here that there is a typographical error in the statement of Deepak Kumar when he mentioned the said recovery memo regarding taking of currency notes as Ex. PO, whereas it should have been Ex. PE. It may be mentioned here that there is a typographical error in the statement of Deepak Kumar when he mentioned the said recovery memo regarding taking of currency notes as Ex. PO, whereas it should have been Ex. PE. In fact, in the very next line, Deepak Kumar mentioned about the memo regarding the nip containing the solution of hand wash as Ex. PO which is as per the record, whereas the recovery memo of currency notes is Ex. PE. 11. Ravi Kumar PW9, who was the shadow witness in the case, did not support the case of the prosecution at all. He denied making any statement before DSP Vipan Chaudhary. However, he admitted that Ex. PO, PE and PF were signed by him but the same were not read over to him and his signatures obtained on blank papers. As mentioned above, memos Ex. PO pertained to recovery of nip containing the solution of hand wash, Ex. PE is the recovery memo qua the taking into possession of the tainted notes from the accused and Ex. PF pertained to recovery memo of the nip containing solution of pocket wash. 12. Sat Pal PW5, who at the relevant time was posted as SDE in PUDA, deposed in his examination-in-chief that when he along with the raiding party reached the courtyard of the Police Station, the accused was caught by two persons by holding him by his arms. At this, the accused took out the currency notes from his pocket and threw the same on the ground. The hands of the accused were then washed, which came out to be positive qua the presence of phenolphthalein powder. The currency notes were picked up from the ground. As he did not support the case of the prosecution regarding the recovery of the tainted notes from the pocket of the accused, a request was made by learned Additional Public Prosecutor for cross-examining him. During the same, he did not toe the line of the prosecution about the aforementioned fact. However, it has to be seen that he admitted the case of the prosecution upto the point of the visit of the raiding party to the courtyard of the Police Station and after the accused was apprehended by two persons from his arms, he took out the currency notes from his pocket and threw the same on the ground. However, it has to be seen that he admitted the case of the prosecution upto the point of the visit of the raiding party to the courtyard of the Police Station and after the accused was apprehended by two persons from his arms, he took out the currency notes from his pocket and threw the same on the ground. It establishes that the tainted notes had already reached the pocket of the accused before the raiding party reached the spot. 13. Piara Lal PW6, who was the other witness to the recovery of the currency notes from the accused, did not support the case of the prosecution and was declared hostile. Even in his cross-examination, no material could be elicited by the Additional Public Prosecutor. 14. We have now the testimony of DSP Vipan Chaudhary PW10. Though he was the one who had recorded the statement Ex. PJ of complainant Deepak Kumar, yet he has made a clear and convincing statement that after the receipt of the signal, the raiding party had reached the spot and the accused was apprehended. The arms of the accused were secured. Hand wash was taken and the colour of the liquid turned into light pink. He then directed Sat Pal, SDE to conduct personal search of the accused which yielded the tainted money from the right side pocket of the pant worn by the accused. The pocket wash also turned out to be positive. He denied the suggestion that no recovery was effected from the trouser of the accused. There is no reason as to why the testimony of DSP Vipan Chaudhary PW10 should not be believed, especially in regard to the recovery of the tainted money from the accused. No enmity or ill-will has been suggested by the defence to this witness which could impel him to make an incorrect statement. Though, in his statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C., the accused stated that he along with HC Harvinder Singh was lifted forcibly from in front of the main gate of C.I.A. Staff by DSP Vipan Chaudhary when they were watching Nagar Kirtan in connection with birthday celebrations of Shri Guru Nanak Dev Ji but different plea was taken when it was suggested to DSP Vipan Chaudhary that the accused was dragged outside from the C.I.A. Staff. It was also suggested that the accused and HC Harvinder Singh were lifted from the spot and brought to Vigilance Bureau. The spot in the case relates to a place, which was in the courtyard of Police Station, Division No.2, Jalandhar. It, thus, shows that the accused is not sure as to which plea he should take. In fact, he had no clear and convincing plea to suggest to the witnesses so as to establish that he was being falsely implicated in the case. 15. The appellant had the occasion to demand and receive the bribe from complainant Deepak Kumar. On 8.11.2000, the co-workers of Deepak Kumar complainant were apprehended by C.I.A. Staff, Jalandhar and booked in a case under Section 13-A of the Gambling Act. Those two workers were released on bail on the same day. When Deepak Kumar went to C.I.A. Staff so as to obtain the diary, which was taken into possession at the time of apprehension of Ravi Kumar and Gurdip Singh, the appellant asked him to pay a sum of Rs. 3,000/- as bribe, which amount was finally settled at Rs. 2,500/-. Deepak Kumar PW8, during his cross­ examination by the defence, stated that the diary was in possession of the accused, which was seized by the police at that time. Even otherwise, the recovery of the diary from the appellant was proved by the testimony of HC Malkiat Rai PW11, who was one of the attesting witnesses of recovery memo Ex.PH. 16. In view of the above, the prosecution has been able to establish that the appellant had demanded bribe from Deepak Kumar complainant on 8.11.2000 and then on 9.11.2000. The same was then accepted by the appellant on the latter date. Those currency notes were recovered from the pocket of the appellant. The acceptance of the bribe money is clear from the fact that the hand wash of the accused resulted into the solution of water and sodium carbonate turning into pink and so also the pocket wash. Even from the recovery of the tainted money from the appellant, the Court can raise a presumption that the same had been received by the appellant as illegal gratification, especially In view of the testimony of complainant Deepak Kumar himself. He stated about the demand made from him by the appellant on 8.11.2000 and 9.11.2000. 17. Even from the recovery of the tainted money from the appellant, the Court can raise a presumption that the same had been received by the appellant as illegal gratification, especially In view of the testimony of complainant Deepak Kumar himself. He stated about the demand made from him by the appellant on 8.11.2000 and 9.11.2000. 17. Resultantly, the conviction and sentence of the appellant under Sections 7 and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act does not call for any interference. The appeal is, accordingly, dismissed. ———————————————