Orissa High Court Upholds Acquittal Of Nurse Accused Of Taking ₹400 Bribe For Releasing Cheque Under Janani Surakhya Yojana
The Orissa High Court recently upheld the order of acquittal passed in favour of an Auxiliary Nurse Midwife (ANM) who was accused of demanding and accepting ₹400 bribe for issuing financial benefit under the Janani Surakhya Yojana (JSY) to a lady who delivered her baby in a government hospital.While dismissing the appeal preferred by the Vigilance Department against the order of acquittal...
The Orissa High Court recently upheld the order of acquittal passed in favour of an Auxiliary Nurse Midwife (ANM) who was accused of demanding and accepting ₹400 bribe for issuing financial benefit under the Janani Surakhya Yojana (JSY) to a lady who delivered her baby in a government hospital.
While dismissing the appeal preferred by the Vigilance Department against the order of acquittal of the respondent-nurse, the Single Bench of Justice Sangam Kumar Sahoo held,
“There is no perversity or illegality in the impugned judgment. The learned trial Judge has not ignored any material evidence on record and after assessing it carefully, he has reached at the conclusion and has given benefit of doubt to the respondent. Therefore, it is not a fit case where the impugned judgment and order of acquittal is to be interfered with.”
Prosecution Case
On 07.09.2010, the wife of the complainant delivered a child in a government hospital. As per the JSY scheme, the women who deliver at government hospital were entitled to receive an amount of ₹1400 from the government.
However, the complainant alleged that the respondent-nurse demanded a bribe amount of ₹400 for issuing the cheque in favour of his wife. Accordingly, he filed a written complaint and a trap was laid to get hold of the respondent while she receives the bribe amount.
The respondent was caught in the trap and after investigation, a charge-sheet was filed against her under Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) and Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The trial Court, however, acquitted her of such charges. Therefore, the Vigilance Department carried an appeal to the High Court against the order of acquittal.
Court’s Observations
The Court, at the outset, reminded itself of the settled position of law which needs to be followed while adjudging an appeal against acquittal under Section 378 of the CrPC. It held that the Appellate Court has to be relatively slow in reversing the order of the trial Court rendering acquittal as the presumption in favour of the accused gets strengthened by his acquittal by the trial Court.
“Such a double presumption that enures in favour of the accused has to be disturbed only by thorough scrutiny on the accepted legal parameters. When two views are possible, the one taken by the trial Court in a case of acquittal is to be followed on the touchstone of liberty along with the advantage of having seen the witnesses,” the Court observed.
The Bench noted that the evidence of the medical officer that the wife of the complainant could not obtain the financial benefit under the JSY scheme during the time of her delivery and discharge from the hospital as she could not produce the mother child health card.
It further noted that from the date of discharge, i.e. 07.09.2010 till 25.09.2010 neither the complainant nor his wife came to the hospital to collect the cheque by submitting the copy of mother child health card. The Court was of the considered opinion that the evidence of the medical officer regarding aforesaid aspect stands corroborated from the evidence of the complainant himself.
Apart from that, the medical officer further deposed that the respondent-nurse was accompanying him throughout the time of delivery and at the time of discharge. Therefore, the Court held that there was no occasion for the respondent to demand the bribe either from the complainant or from his wife.
Prosecution To Stand On Its Own Leg
The Court observed that the defence is not supposed to prove its case beyond all reasonable doubts rather the prosecution has the solemn duty to discharge that burden. A false plea set up by the defence can at best be considered as an additional circumstance against the accused provided that the other evidence on record unfailingly point towards his guilt, it said.
“The prosecution cannot derive any advantage from the falsity or other infirmities of the defence version, so long as it does not discharge its initial burden of proving its case beyond all reasonable doubt. The prosecution has a bounden duty to lead an impenetrable chain of evidence suggesting the guilt of the accused and it must stand on its own leg without borrowing credence from falsity of defence evidence,” the Court further observed.
Hence, after perusing the JSY card of the wife of the complainant and the disbursement register, the Court came to the conclusion that the monetary benefit under the JSY scheme to the tune of ₹1400/- was disbursed by way of cheque only on 25.09.2010 and such gap between the date of delivery and issuance of cheque was due to non-submission of mother child health card.
Therefore, the Court was of the considered view that the trial Court did not err in acquitting the respondent-nurse of the aforesaid charges and accordingly, upheld the same.
Case Title: State of Odisha (G.A. Vigilance) v. Sanjubala Rout
Case No.: GCRLA No. 29 of 2018
Date of Judgment: August 17, 2023
Counsel for the Appellant-State: Mr. Sangram Das, Standing Counsel (Vigilance)
Counsel for the Respondent: Mr. S.C. Mekap, Advocate
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ori) 93