The case “S. P. CBI Anti Corruption vs. Tej Krishan Koul” filled under High court of Jammu and Kashmir is an appeal against the judgment of acquittal dated 22.11.2004 passed by the learned Special Judge, Anti Corruption, Jammu, whereby the respondent/accused has been acquitted of the charges levelled against him by the prosecution. The appellant seeks the reversal of the judgment by convicting the respondent/accused for the offences with which he has been charged.
The prosecution case is that a written complaint dated 12.09.2000 was lodged by the complainant Sh. Vinod Uppal S/o Sh. J.C.Uppal R/o Quarter No.30, Resham Garh Colony, Jammu (PW-1) before the authorities of CBI stating therein that the accused-T.K.Koul, Telecom Transmission Assistant, BSNL and G. L. Bhat, JTO, Shakti Nagar, Exchange, demanded an illegal gratification of Rs.1000/- from him in connection with an already installed STD/PCO in his name at Resham Garh Colony, Jammu. PW-1 further stated that in the event of not complying with the demand of the payment of bribe money to the accused and G. L. Bhat, he was told that the STD/PCO would be disconnected. After verification of the facts by Sh. Rajbir Singh, Inspector (PW-2) and filling of FIR a team was constituted to lay a trap on the accused persons. Sh. Gurdeep Singh Bali, AAO, New India Insurance Co. Limited Jammu (PW-3) and Sh. R. S. Salaria, Assistant Branch United India Co. Limited (PW-4) were associated with the trap team in the capacity of the independent witnesses. The whole process of trap conducted by the trap team to find whether the accused is guilty or not the members of the trap team conducted the process where they tainted rupees 100 notes with phenolphthalein powder to see chemical reaction with Sodium Carbonate solution. After the whole process of trap and all the facts examined thoroughly it was found (with the help of evidence presented by PW 4) the accused was found not to be guilty and the blame by the prosecution was held to be false.
The core issue that arises for consideration here in this appeal is whether, while recording the judgment of conviction and sentence, the prosecution evidence has been appreciated and scanned in the right perspective. The trial Court has recorded the entire evidence in its breadth and length in the impugned judgment and the same does not require to be repeated here. The trial Court, as is clear from the impugned judgment, has, after taking into consideration the entire evidence adduced by the prosecution, come to the conclusion that the prosecution has failed to rebut the presumption of the innocence of the accused.
The judgment of the trial Court illustrates and elucidates each and every aspect of the case. The trial Court has on the basis of the facts and the law applied to the case rightly concluded that the evidence of PW-4 who has shaken the very substratum and the foundation of the prosecution case is credit worthy both on its merit and intrinsic value. It is correct to state that the statement of PW-4 is neither in line nor in tune to the prosecution version in the matter of the demand, acceptance and the recovery of the bribe money. The trial Court has meticulously analysed and appreciated the statement of PW-1 and has rightly viewed that his statement is not free from blemish. The trial Court has explained in the expositive judgment as to how and why it is so. The trial Court on an analysis of the other evidence on record has rightly opined that the prosecution has failed to corroborate the testimony of PW-1 in the material particulars of the case. The judgment of the trial Court is descriptive. It touches all the aspects of the case and nothing further requires to be added to it. It cannot be called in question on any of the grounds be that the application of law or the appreciation of the evidence.