STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. VIRAMBHAI LILABHAI DESAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been filed by the appellant - State under Sec. 378(1)(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the judgment and order of acquittal dtd. 18/7/2006 passed by the learned Special Judge (A.C.B.) at Gandhinagar (herein after referred to as 'the learned Trial Court') in Special (ACB) Case No. 02 of 2003, whereby, the learned trial Court has acquitted the respondents from the offences punishable under Ss. 7, 13(1) (d) read with 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act (herein after referred to as 'the Act'). The respondents are hereinafter referred to as 'the accused' as they stood in the original case, for the sake of convenience, clarity and brevity.

(2.) The brief facts that emerge from the record of the case are as under:-

(3.) Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and order of acquittal, the appellant-State has filed the present appeal mainly stating that the judgment and order passed by the learned trial Court is illegal, unjust and improper and is required to be quashed and set aside. That the case of the prosecution is that the accused No. 1 who was serving as a Deputy Mamlatdar in District Supply Office was present in the meeting with the District Supply Officer, Mr D.A.Shah and after negotiations, the amount was fixed at ?5/- lakhs as the illegal2,50,000/-. That the owners of the Gas Agencies had agreed that each member shall pay an amount of ?5/- lakhs as the illegal12,000/-, and the entire amount was required to be paid on 05/10/2002. That on the day of the trap, the complainant along with the Panch witness went to Ashirwad Gas Agency, Sector 11, Gandhinagar, where they met the accused No. 2 Jitendrasinh Joravarsinh Parmar and they handed over the currency notes of ?5/- lakhs as the illegal24,000/- to the accused No. 2 Jitendrasinh Joravarsinh Parmar, who added the currency notes of ?5/- lakhs as the illegal24,000/- to the currency notes which were collected from the other distributors and the entire sum of ?5/- lakhs as the illegal72,000/- was wrapped in the newspaper and the complainant, panch witness, and Jitendrasinh Joravarsinh Parmar went to the office of the accused. It is the case of the prosecution that both the accused had gone into the chamber of Mr.D.A.Shah, District Supply Officer and thereafter the accused No. 1 escaped from the place of incident. That the muddamal was recovered from one abandoned car, which was parked in the compound of District Magistrate, Gandhinagar and when the Trap Laying Officer had reached the chamber of Mr. D.A.Shah, District Supply Officer, the accused No. 1 escaped from the place of incident, which clearly shows that the accused No. 1 was the culprit and when the hands of the the accused No. 2 were checked, they were found with the traces of the anthracene powder. That the traces of anthracene powder was also found on the table, which was occupied by the accused No. 1 and Prosecution Witness No. 4-the panch witness has clearly stated that the bundle of currency notes was given to the accused No. 2, which shows that the accused No. 2 was also involved in the offences. That the learned trial Court has not considered the evidence of the prosecution and has misread the evidence and passed the order of acquittal, which is required to be quashed and set aside and both the accused must be found guilty for the offences.