Order 24

Order Details: COPY OF ORDER
Pdf Text: IN THE COURT OF DEEPALI SHARMA
SPECIAL JUDGE: PC ACT: ACB-01:
ROUSE AVENUE COURT COMPLEX: NEW DELHI
CNR No. 000042-2023
CC No. 04/2023
FIR No. 07/2014
PS : ACB
State Vs Ct. Sandeep Kumar
14.02.2025
ORDER ON CHARGE
1. Briefly stated, prosecution case is that on
11.01.2014, complainant Sahil approached ACB and gave a
written complaint stating that he used to run an NGO and they
used to sell articles at different places and the profit generated
therefrom was used to help HIV positive persons. For the said
purpose, they used to park an Echo car outside Electricity Office,
District Centre, Janakpuri and sell warm jackets from it. For the
said purpose, they had to give beat officer Hemraj, PS Janakpuri
Rs.3,000/- every month. They had started stationing the car since
December 2013 when they were stopped by beat officer, PS
Janakpuri from doing so and initially they demanded Rs.10,000/-
but the said amount was reduced to Rs.3,000/-. In December
2013, complainant had given Rs.3,000/- to beat officer Sandeep.
In January 2014 on 10.01.2014, he received a phone call from
beat officer Hemraj on his mobile phone and he demanded the
monthly amount for January 2014 and the complainant made an
audio recording of the same. He wanted action to be taken
against the said police officials.
CC NO. 04/2023 State vs. Ct. Sandeep Kumar FIR No. 07/2014, PS ACB Page 1 of 6
-- 1 of 6 --
2. The complaint was assigned to Insp. Manoj
Aggarwal. The complainant also handed over Rs. 3000/- to Insp.
Manoj Aggarwal in the presence of panch witness consisting of
six GC notes of Rs.500/- each. The Raid Officer Insp. Manoj
Aggarwal noted down the serial numbers of the currency notes
i.e. six notes of denomination of Rs.500/-. Pre-raid proceedings
were conducted and the specialty of phenolphthalein powder was
explained to complainant and panch witness. The
phenolphthalein powder was applied on those currency notes and
the said notes were kept by the complainant in right side pocket
of his wearing pant during the said proceedings.
3. Subsequently raid was conducted at BSES Gate,
District Centre, Jankakpuri and at the pointing of panch witness
Ct. Sandeep and Ct. Ishwar Singh were apprehended. The panch
witness stated that Ct. Sandeep had obtained Rs.3,000/- from the
complainant Sahil and had kept them in the left pocket of his
Khaki jacket with his left hand. The other constable present
alongwith Ct. Sandeep was Ct. Ishwar Singh. The bribe amount
of Rs.3,000/- i.e. six phenolphthalein powder smeared currency
notes of Rs.500/- denomination was recovered from Ct. Sandeep.
Upon taking his left handwash, the sodium carbonate solution
turned pink. The wash of left pocket of the
Khakhi jacket of Ct.
Sandeep was also taken which turned pink. The exhibits were
seized and kept in sealed condition. FIR bearing no. 07/2014
was registered against Ct. Sandeep, Ct. Ishwar Singh, Hemraj
and Subhash u/s 7/13 Prevention of Corruption Act (hereinafter
referred as PC Act) r/w Section 34/120B IPC.
CC NO. 04/2023 State vs. Ct. Sandeep Kumar FIR No. 07/2014, PS ACB Page 2 of 6
-- 2 of 6 --
4. Necessary investigation was conducted by the IO.
The CDR and CAF of the mobile phone numbers of the accused
persons and the complainant were obtained. The original micro
SD card and the audio CDs having audio recording between the
complainant, Ct. Hemraj, HC Subhash and Ct. Sandeep were
seized by the IO. The voice samples of the complainant and the
accused persons were taken and the voice recordings alongwith
the voice samples were sent to FSL for evaluation and analysis.
The left handwash and left side pocket wash of jacket of accused
Ct. Sandeep were also sent to FSL, Rohini for examination. As
per the FSL result dated 06.03.2014, the left handwash and left
side pocket wash of jacket of accused Ct. Sandeep were found to
contain phenolphthalein and sodium carbonate.
5. As per the FSL result dated 30.11.2015, there was
no indication of any form of alteration in the audio files
contained in the CD and memory card containing audio files. It
was also revealed that the voice of speakers marked Exhibit-Q1
and Exhibit-S1 was the possible voice of the same person i.e. Ct.
Hemraj. It was further opined that the voice of speakers marked
Exhibit-Q2 and Exhibit-S2 was the possible voice of the same
person i.e. Sahil. Similarly the voice of speaker was found to be
the possible voice of Subhash, however no opinion was given
regarding accused Sandeep for want of sufficient voice
exemplars in the recorded speech. The statements of witnesses
were recorded. Sanction for prosecution u/s 19 PC Act was
granted against the accused persons. After completion of charge-
sheet was filed against the accused persons U/s 7/13 P.C. Act
read with section 34/120B IPC.
CC NO. 04/2023 State vs. Ct. Sandeep Kumar FIR No. 07/2014, PS ACB Page 3 of 6
-- 3 of 6 --
6. Vide order dated 03.09.2024 in Crl. CRL MC no.
5376/2024, accused Ishwar Singh was discharged in the present
case by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court. Thereafter, accused
Subhash and Hemraj were also discharged by the Hon’ble Delhi
High Court, vide orders dated 23.09.2024 in Crl. M.C. No.
7518/2024 and 25.10.2024 in Crl. MC No. 8494/2024
respectively.
7. It is contended by Ld. Counsel for accused Ct.
Sandeep Kumar that since the remaining three accused persons
have already been discharged in the present case, therefore
charge under section 34 and section 120 B IPC cannot be framed
against accused Ct. Sandeep Kumar. It is stated that the voice of
accused Ct. Sandeep Kumar is not identified in the audio
recording and even the alleged mobile number of the
complainant is not found to be belonging to him. It is also urged
that even as per the allegations against accused Ct. Sandeep
Kumar, he had merely accepted the alleged amount from the
complainant and it is settled law that mere acceptance would not
attract section 7 and 13 PC Act. It is stated that there is no
demand of bribe by accused Ct. Sandeep Kumar even as per the
prosecution case, hence accused Ct. Sandeep Kumar is liable to
be discharged of the offences he has been charge-sheeted with.
8. On the other hand, it is contended by Ld. Chief PP
for State that at the time of raid, the accused Ct. Sandeep Kumar
demanded and obtained bribe from the complainant and he has
been caught red-handed. The FSL result is also incriminating
CC NO. 04/2023 State vs. Ct. Sandeep Kumar FIR No. 07/2014, PS ACB Page 4 of 6
-- 4 of 6 --
against accused Ct. Sandeep Kumar. It is urged that prima facie
there is sufficient material on record to frame charge against
accused Ct. Sandeep Kumar U/s 7/13(1)(d) of PC Act.
9. I have heard ld. Counsel for the parties and perused
the record.
10. It is a settled legal position that prosecution is
required to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. However, at
the stage of framing of charge, the Court has only to see whether
prima facie case is made out against the accused. In this regard, it
is held in
Amit Kapoor Vs. Ramesh Chander, 2012 (9) SCC, 460
as under:
“19. At the initial stage of framing of a charge,
the court is concerned not with proof but with a
strong suspicion that the accused has committed
an offence, which, if put to trial, could prove him
guilty. All that the court has to see is that the
material on record and the facts would be
compatible with the innocence of the accused or
not. The final test of guilt is not to be applied at
that stage.”
11. Thus, at the stage of charge, the court is neither
required to see the probative value of the evidence nor the
sufficiency of material is to be gone into. Whether the trial would
eventually result into conviction of the accused or not is also not
material.
12. After considering the rival submissions as well as
going through charge-sheet and other material placed on record,
CC NO. 04/2023 State vs. Ct. Sandeep Kumar FIR No. 07/2014, PS ACB Page 5 of 6
-- 5 of 6 --
it is manifest that accused Ct. Sandeep Kumar was caught red-
handed while obtaining the bribe amount of Rs.3000/- from the
complainant. Sanction to prosecute Ct. Sandeep Kumar u/s 19 of
PC Act has been granted. In view of the foregoing, I am of the
considered opinion that prima facie a case for the offence under
section 7 of Prevention of Corruption Act and u/s 13(1)(d) of PC
Act punishable u/s 13(2) PC Act is made out against the accused
Ct. Sandeep Kumar. Accordingly, charge be framed against him.
Announced in the open court ( Deepali Sharma )
on 14th day of February, 2025 Special Judge, PC Act (ACB-01)
RACC, New Delhi.
CC NO. 04/2023 State vs. Ct. Sandeep Kumar FIR No. 07/2014, PS ACB Page 6 of 6
-- 6 of 6 --