Criminal Appeal No. 526/2016
High Court of Delhi
BENCH: Hon’ble Mr. Sunil Gaur J.
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 01-04-2019
BRANCH OF FORENSIC SCIENCE: Voice analysis (Forensic Physics)
RELEVANT SECTIONS/ACTS:
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988
- Sections 7 – Public servant taking gratification other than legal remuneration in respect of an official act.
- Sections 12 – Punishment for abetment of offences defined in section 7 or 11.
- Sections 13(1) (d) – Criminal misconduct by a public servant.
(d) If he—
(i) By corrupt or illegal means, obtains for himself or for any other person any valuable thing or pecuniary advantage; or
(ii) By abusing his position as a public servant, obtains for himself or for any other person any valuable thing or pecuniary advantage.
(iii) While holding office as a public servant, obtains for any person any valuable thing or pecuniary advantage without any public interest.
- Section 13(2) – Any public servant who commits criminal misconduct shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall be not less than one year but which may extend to seven years and shall also be liable to fine.
BACK STORY
This case is all about the officials of Municipal Corporation Delhi (MCD) (i.e. A-1 to A-4) namely S.K. Lakra (A-1), Jaibir Sherawat (A-2), Umesh Parashar (A3), Virender Pal (A-4) who demanded and accepted illegal gratification with Mukesh (A-6), a middleman and Piyush Goel (A-5) to extract money from various building owners in Karol Bagh, New Delhi area in lieu of inaction against illegal construction, etc.
Briefly stating to the fact of the case, On 01.05.2009, FIR under Delhi Municipal Corporation (DMC) Act, 1957 registered, and the Building Department of MCD receives complaints regarding unauthorized constructions with respect to public property no. 13/28, WEA, Karol Bagh, New Delhi was sold by Dr. Deepak Oberoid and Mrs. Jyoti Oberoi during Feb. 2006 to four buyers including S.K.Gupta & Sons, HUF through its Karta S.K. Gupta each having ownership of 1/4th undivided shares. The 3/4th of the undivided property i.e. the except the portion in the name of S.K.Gupta and (HUF) was further purchased by M/s Prime Education Instructions Pvt. Ltd., during June 2008. S.K.Gupta (PW31) along with Piyush Goel (A-5) along with and others are Directions in the company and it directed by MCD that during the period November 2008 to April 2009 that ground floor can be used only for the residential purpose and no fresh construction can be done there but Piyush Goyal has reconstructed new room illegally at the ground floor for commercial purpose.
During the investigation by the Special Unit, CBI, New Delhi,(A Nos. 1-4) caught involving in this illegal construction work, and their telephonic conversation during the period November 2008 to April, were collected and sent voice analysis to CFSL voice expert for spectrographic comparison.
The conversations established (A-2) had been in touch (A3), (A-4), (A-6), (A-5) and (A-1) has also demanded and accepted the bribe from Piyush Goel and also asked (A-4) to pay 1 lakh to Umesh Parashar (A-3). The conversation also shows that Virender Pal (A4) on the direction of his superior i.e. Jaibir Sherawat, has demanded and accepted the bribe to the tune of Rs.37.60 lakhs from Piyush Goel either directly or through Mukesh Gupta for allowing unauthorized construction at and Mukesh Gupta (A-6) has played the role of a mediator to ensure smooth transaction of bribe amount asked Jaibir Sherawat to get two rooms constructed at the top floor of the Property in order to save the entire building from demolition.
The diary of the Piyush Goyal named “Benami” (expenditures details of the illegal construction bribe accepted and demanded) also sent to CFSL for comparison with the handwriting of Piyush Goel to corroborate the payment detail made by him with the taped conversation.
QUESTIONED DOCUMENT (Handwriting) REPORT
The diary was also sent to CFSL for comparison with the handwriting of Piyush Goel but the report the same did not tally.
VOICE IDENTIFICATION REPORT
The Investigating Officer Pawan Kumar (PW-5) sent voice specimen samples of accused persons along with the questioned along in the CDs containing intercepted calls to the D.K. Tanwar, Voice Identification Expert (PW-25) and he gives his report that both specimen and questioned voice matches.
But the digital CDRs evidence was found not in a sealed parcel so the court denied relying on this weak piece of evidence and said this digital evidence to be tempered, edited, or damaged.
JUDGMENT
The voice not identified by any of the witnesses i.e. neighbor of that property holder and voice evidence also discarded by the court, handwriting does not match with the accused Piyush Goyal handwriting and Mahipal Singh, Junior Engineer, MCD (DW-1), as this witness has deposed that he had not found any unauthorized construction in the property so due to lack of credence and corroboration by scientific evidence court gave the judgment of 7th May 2018 and order on the sentence of 9th May 2019 are accordingly set aside and appellants before charge with Sections 7, 12 & 13(1) (d) r/w Section 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 is hereby acquitted. Fine, if deposited, be refunded forthwith.