9. DW-1 an Attender working in the SETNEL Office, Nellore at the relevant time supported the version of the respondent, He had categorically stated before the trial court that while he, the respondent and the Senior Assistant were proceeding to have tea PW-1 came and thrusted currency notes into the shirt pocket of the respondent forcibly in an open place. The version of this witness was believed by the learned trial court taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case. The learned Special Public Prosecutor for ACB Cases would contend that when the respondent was examined under section 239 Cr.P.C., in response to the charges framed against him, he did not state about the presence of DW-1 and therefore the version of DW-1 ought not to have been believed by the trial court. I absolutely see no force in the contention. The respondent specifically denied the charge and receiving any amount from PW-1 and he stated before the learned trial court that PW-1 thrusted the currency notes into his short pocket. A formal denial of the charges is enough in an examination under section 239 Cr.P.C. and the respondent is not expected to give details of the persons, who were present at that time of PW-1 thrusting currency notes into his pocket, while answering the charges framed against him.
