VIGILANCE MANUAL VOLUME III - AP Online

490 DECISION - 219
(C) Trap — appreciation of evidence
Appreciation of evidence in a trap case, where
complainant died before commencement of trial.
Conviction by Special Judge upheld by High Court
and Supreme Court.
Kishan Chand Mangal vs. State of Rajasthan,
AIR 1982 SC 1511
Appellant, Factory Inspector, was convicted by Special Judge,
Jaipur for offences under sec. 161 IPC and sec. 5 (1) (d) read with
sec. 5 (2) of the P.C. Act, 1947 (corresponding to secs. 7 and 13(1)(d)
read with 13(2) of P.C. Act, 1988) for demanding and accepting an
illegal gratification of Rs.150 from the complainant in a trap laid by
the Anti-Corruption Department on 22-11-1974. By the time the case
came up for trial, the complainant was dead and his evidence was
not available. Prosecution examined the two mediators to the trap
proceedings and the Deputy Superintendent of Police who laid the
trap. After an unsuccessful appeal to the High Court, the appellant
preferred an appeal by special leave.
The Supreme Court observed that the Special Judge noted
the fact that the complainant was not available but held that the
evidence of the two mediator witnesses was reliable and was amply
corroborated by the recovery of the currency notes as well as the
positive result of the phenolphthalein test on the hands of the accused.
The Special Judge rejected the defence version that the currency
notes were planted when the appellant had gone into the bath room.
The Supreme Court held that the absence of the name of
the appellant in the complaint was hardly of any significance. On the
question whether there is any evidence of demand of bribe on
20.11.1974, the Supreme Court observed that a fact may be proved
either by direct testimony or by circumstantial evidence. On the
contention of appellant that once the complainant was not available