STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. HIRABHAI SHANKERBHAI PATEL

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. 4/3/2006 passed by the learned Special Judge, Fast Track Court No. 2, Jamnagar (herein after referred to as 'the learned Trial Court') in Special (ACB) Case No. 2 of 2001, whereby, the learned trial Court has acquitted the respondent 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 PC Act'). The respondent is hereinafter referred to as 'the accused' as he 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 of the learned Court is illegal and has been passed without proper appreciation of the evidence. That the prosecution has proved that the respondents were working in the Jamnagar City 'A' Division Police Station and were public servants and the panch witnesses, Trap Laying Officer and the Investigating Officers have fully supported the case of the prosecution. That it is proved by the prosecution that the accused demanded the amount of illegal gratification from the complainant- Atulbhai Kishorebhai Dodiya and the amount was accepted by the accused No. 2 for him and on behalf of the accused No. 1. That even though the original complainant- Atulbhai Kishorebhai Dodiya and his brother Pareshbhai Kishorebhai Dodiya have not supported the case of the prosecution, the independent witnesses have supported the case of the prosecution and there are no major contradictions, which would vitiate the trial. That, the muddamal handkerchief and currency notes were recovered from the accused No. 2 and the learned trial Court ought to have appreciated that the burden lies on the accused to prove that they did not accept the amount of illegal gratification. That, the panch witnesses are government employees and independent witnesses and have fully supported the case of the prosecution but the learned trial Court has committed an error in passing the judgment and order of acquittal. That the judgment and order of acquittal is erroneous, improper and unjust and hence the appeal must be allowed and both the accused must be convicted for the said offence.