DATTATRY MAUKHRIWALE Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises out of the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dtd. 6/8/1999 passed by learned Special Judge, Rajnandgaon, in Special Criminal Case No. 03/95 whereby and whereunder, learned Judge convicted the appellant as under:- <FRM>JUDGEMENT_74_LAWS(CHH)7_2022_1.html</FRM>

(2.) The case of the prosecution, in short, is that on 2/5/1990, complainant Ram Kumar Gupta (PW-4) lodged a written complaint (Ex. P/1) before the Superintendent of Police Vigilance Department, Raipur mentioning therein that for the establishment of Haller Mill and Plore Mill in the Village Tedesara, he got Rs.35,000.00 loan from Lead Office of Dena Bank, Rajnandgaon, granted by District Industrial Centre and the same was transferred to Dena Bank Somni Branch. Thereafter, complainant produced all the documents asked by Branch Manger Dena Bank, Somni. Despite producing the correct and required documents, appellant demanded Rs.3,000.00 for granting the loan. As the complainant did not want to give Rs.3,000.00 to the appellant, he filed a written complaint. Thereafter, a trap party was constituted by Police Inspector M.L. Mishra (PW-1). Phenolphthalein mixed currency of Rs.3,000.00 were given to the complainant and along with the trap witness Krishna Kumar he was sent to the house of appellant. When they reached the house of appellant, appellant took them inside his house and asked for the money consequently, complainant gave Rs.3,000.00 to the appellant. Thereafter, as per plan, trap party entered the house of appellant and caught him read handed. The phenolphthalein mixed currency were recovered from the appellant and when his hand was washed, the color of mixture turned into pink. After completion of investigation, charge-sheet was filed against the appellant, FIR (Ex. P/29) was registered against him and the trial Court framed charges under Ss. 7 and 13(1)(d) R/w Sec. 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act against the appellant.

(3.) So as to hold the accused/appellant guilty, the prosecution has examined as many as 9 witnesses. Statement of the accused/appellant was also recorded under Sec. 313 of the Cr.P.C. in which he denied the charges levelled against him and pleaded innocence and false implication in the case. Appellant has also examined 3 witnesses in his defence.