LAWS(GJH)-2024-3-261

STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. GHANSHYAMSINH JUWANSINH JADEJA

Decided On March 26, 2024
STATE OF GUJARAT Appellant
V/S
Ghanshyamsinh Juwansinh Jadeja Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been filed by the appellant under Sec. 378(1)(3) of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the judgement and order of acquittal passed by the learned Special Judge (Fast Track Court No. 2), Jamnagar (hereinafter referred to as "the learned Trial Court") in Special Case No. 13 of 1992 on 30/1/2006, whereby, the learned Trial Court has acquitted the appellant for the offence punishable under Ss. 7, 13(1)(d) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as "the PC Act" for short). 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 said judgement and order of acquittal, the appellant - State has filed the present appeal mainly contending that the accused was a public servant and the prosecution has proved the case against the accused beyond reasonable doubts. That the prosecution has successfully established the elements of demand, acceptance and recovery but the learned Trial Court has not properly appreciated the evidence and the various judgements relied upon by the prosecution and has erred in passing the order of acquittal. That Police Sub- Inspector - Mr. N.N. Nagar in his evidence at Exh. 19 has stated that the punter and panch witness no. 1 were present and other staff members of the ACB were in the cabin of the truck and they have supported the case of the prosecution. That the learned Trial Court has committed an error in concluding that the demand of illegal gratification is not proved by the prosecution and has also erred in concluding that the acceptance is not done in the presence of the prosecution witness no. 1. That the judgement and order of acquittal is erroneous, unjust and improper and is required to be quashed and set aside and the accused must be convicted for all the offences.