TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (3) TMI 1454
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rch 2, 2010. 2. The facts, as are evident from the paper book, are that a demand of Rs. 500/- was made as illegal gratification and the Appellant accepted a sum of Rs. 300/- for supplying copy of death certificate of Maghar Singh (deceased). 3. In the complaint, it was alleged that for getting the death certificate of Maghar Singh S/o. Hari Singh, who expired on 6.3.2003, Ranjit Singh, his son, requested his cousin Jit Singh to collect the same. On 17.10.2003, Jit Singh/complainant met the Appellant in connection with supply of death certificate, who demanded Rs. 500/- as illegal gratification. Final settlement was for payment of Rs. 300/-. As Ajit Singh was reluctant to pay the illegal gratification, he contacted Chamkaur Singh, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....to prepare the death certificate. He otherwise was not responsible for that job as he was merely working as cleaner in the office. 5. HC Kirpal Singh (PW-4), HC Parsan Singh (PW-6) and C. Surinderjit Singh (PW-7) were the formal witnesses whereas Harbans Kaur, Clerk of Civil Surgeon, Faridkot (PW-5) proved certain official record and sanction of prosecution in the case of the Appellant. Gurjinder Singh, (PW-8), District Social Security Officer, Faridkot stated about recovery of Rs. 300/- from the Appellant. These were the same currency notes which were coated with phenolphthalein powder. In his statement recorded Under Section 313 Code of Criminal Procedure, the Appellant submitted that he has been falsely implicated in the case. 6. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....egal gratification by a public servant as a fact in issue by the prosecution is a sine qua non in order to establish the guilt of the Accused public servant Under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d)(i) and (ii) of the Act. (b) In order to bring home the guilt of the Accused, the prosecution has to first prove the demand of illegal gratification and the subsequent acceptance as a matter of fact. This fact in issue can be proved either by direct evidence which can be in the nature of oral evidence or documentary evidence. (c) Further, the fact in issue, namely the proof of demand and acceptance of illegal gratification can also be proved by circumstantial evidence in the absence of direct oral and documentary evidence. (d) In o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the public servant when accepted by the bribe giver and in turn there is a payment made which is received by the public servant, would be an offence of obtainment Under Section 13(1)(d) and (i) and (ii) of the Act. (e) The presumption of fact with regard to the demand and acceptance or obtainment of an illegal gratification may be made by a court of law by way of an inference only when the foundational facts have been proved by relevant oral and documentary evidence and not in the absence thereof. On the basis of the material on record, the Court has the discretion to raise a presumption of fact while considering whether the fact of demand has been proved by the prosecution or not. Of course, a presumption of fact is subject to re....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....In the absence of evidence of the complainant (direct/primary, oral/documentary evidence), it is permissible to draw an inferential deduction of culpability/guilt of a public servant Under Section 7 and Section 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Act based on other evidence adduced by the prosecution. (emphasis added) 11. In the case in hand, Jit Singh, complainant as well as Chamkaur Singh, shadow witness have turned hostile. The Trial Court had specifically held that there is no evidence produced on record to prove the demand of illegal gratification. It is not the case in which the demand was reiterated when the money was allegedly paid to him. Gurjinder Singh (PW-8) is only a witness who stated that he had recovered the money ....