| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1962 SLG 2882 = 1962 SLD 2882 = 1962 PLD 441 |
Dacca High Court
Criminal Appeal No. 309 of 1958, decided on 29th January, 1959.
Presented By: Rahman, J
B. K. Basu for P. C. Bose for Appellant. M. Fazlul Huq for the State.
Criminal Appeal No. 309 of 1958, decided on 29th January, 1959.
Presented By: Rahman, J
B. K. Basu for P. C. Bose for Appellant. M. Fazlul Huq for the State.
ASHIT KUMAR ADITYA--Appellant
VERSUS
THE STATE-Respondent
Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)
Section: S. 161
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 161-Acceptance of reward for favour shown in past-Constitutes offence if bribe giver is led to believe that the act would go against him if he did not give bribe ---Prevention of Corruption Act (H of 1947), S. 5 (2). The bribe or illegal gratific4tion for an offence under section 161, Penal Code, 1860, may well be a bribe even if it is paid as reward for favour shown in the past. Whether the act to be done in consideration of a reward amounts to a favour or not, or an official act or not, is not very relevant, if the person giving the bribe is led to believe that the act would go against him if he did not give the bribe. Abdul Bari Sikdar v. The Crown (1955) 7 D L R 457 rel. JUDGMENT The appellant before me was an Assistant Sub-Inspector of Police attached to the Kotwali Police Station at Dacca in June- July, 1957. He has been convicted under section 161 of the Pakistan Penal Code read with subsection (2) of section 5 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 for having taken a sum of Rs. 5 by way of illegal gratification from the complainant P. W. 1 Meher Ali on the 4th of July, 1957, in a tea-stall called the "River View Cafe" situated at Sadarghat, Dacca. The said P. W. 1 Meher Ali was a manufacturer of Diamond Tooth Powder and h(: used to employ canvassers to hawk the said powder at Sadarghat, P. W. 2 Sekandar was such canvasser. This P. W. 2 was on the 2nd of July, 1957, arrested just before sunset together with one Osman Ghani and Saijuddin whilst they were all selling the tooth powder, by the appellant and taken to the Thana for causing an obstruction to the road. When information of this arrest reached P. W. 1 Meher Ali he went to the Thana to get the arrested canvassers of his bailed out. He approached the appellant first, but the latter referred him to the Officer-in-charge. The Officer-in-charge in his turn sent him to the appellant. The appellant took P. W. 1 Meher Ali to the courtyard and demanded money from him for releasing the arrested persons on bail. As the said arrested persons had no money with them P. W. 1 Meher Ali expressed his inability to `pay any amount then and there.…