STATE OF KERALA Vs. K.A. ABDUL RASHEED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted.

(2.) We have before us, divergent findings in a prosecution initiated under Sec. 7 and 13(1)(d) read with 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 ['the Act']. The trial court convicted the accused and imposed a sentence of two years both under Sec. 7 and Sec. 13(1)(d) read with Sec. 13(2) to be suffered concurrently along with a fine of Rs.10,000.00 and default sentence under each of the two provisions. The High Court found that the prevaricating deposition of the complainant who was examined as PW1 failed to establish the necessary ingredients to prove offences under both the Sec. ; particularly the demand. Placing reliance on the Constitution Bench decision of this Court in Neeraj Dutta v. State (NCT of Delhi) [(2023) 4 SCC 731] the accused was acquitted and the State is in appeal.

(3.) We heard Shri Raghenth Basant, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the State who took us through the deposition of PW1 to argue that though inconsistent statements were made, there was sufficient oral evidence regarding the demand and the acceptance stood proved by the evidence of PW1 corroborated by that of PW2 an independent witness and PW17, the officer who led the trap. The acceptance of the amount is admitted by the accused and the explanation offered was a deliberate falsehood.