Krishna Kant Rathod Vs Union of India, through C.B.I.,Jabalpur

Madhya Pradesh High Court (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

CRA, 2013 Judgment Date: Jul 18, 2017

• It is not proved that appellant had received money from complainant as bribe or illegal gratification.
• The complainant turned hostile, there was no other witnesses present at the time of transaction between complainant and appellant. The complainant disowned the contents of his complaint. In these set of facts Hon’ble Apex Court has observed “when complainant disowned his own statement the contents of complaint cannot be relied on”.In the present case the complainant in his examination in chief has categorically denied the fact that the appellant has made any demand of illegal gratification for allotment of berth and accepted it.
• Thus the accused is not required to prove his defense beyond reasonable doubt, but it is to be proved by preponderance of probability.
• When complainant tried to give him money the appellant refused to take the money and returned it to complainant.Thereafter, the complainant kept the money in the diary under the direction of Bhagwan Singh in the absence of appellant. The diary was kept inside the drawaz of table by complainant himself. This shows that the appellant was not knowing the fact that the money was kept inside the diary, therefore, it cannot be presumed that the appellant was in conscious possession of the money.Complainant had stated that the appellant had held the application form and the currency with his right hand and returned the said currency note with his left hand. He refused to take money as illegal gratification.During this act he came in contact with tainted note. Thus, the defense of appellant is duly established by the evidence of complainant