SIRAJBHAI RASULABHAI VORA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) As these Criminal Appeals are arising out of judgment and order dated 30.11.1999 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nadiad, in Special Case No. 15 of 1996, present Appeals are heard together and disposed of by this common judgment.

(2.) The appellants - original accused Nos. 1 and 2 were put on trial for the commission of the offences under Sections 7, 12, 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. By way of impugned judgment and order of conviction and sentence, the learned Judge convicted and sentenced the appellants to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 6 months and to pay fine of Rs. 2000/-, i/d, to further undergo simple imprisonment for 1 month, for the offence punishable under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act. For the offence punishable under Section 13(1)(d) of the Act, the appellants were ordered to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay fine amount of Rs. 2000/-, i/d, to further undergo simple imprisonment for one month. Learned Additional Judge has not separately awarded the sentence for the offence punishable under Section 12 of the Act and has also ordered to run all the sentences concurrently.

(3.) The broad essential facts of the prosecution are that the appellant - accused No. 1 was performing his duties as Talati-Cum-Mantri and appellant - accused No. 2 was working as Peon at Bechri Grampanchayat, Bechri village, Ta. Anand, Dist. Anand. As per the case of the prosecution, the complainant namely Hasmukhbhai Maganbhai Chauhan, who was studying at Bhavans College, Dakor, belonging to Bhoi Caste and therefore, for getting the benefit of reservation, he gave an application in the office of Mamlatdar at Anand, for obtaining the certificate of Other Backward Class (O.B.C.) on 6.2.1996. On 7.2.1996, the office of the Mamlatdar, affixed the stamp on the back portion of the application and by addressing the letter to the accused No. 1 - Talati, intimated the complainant to obtain said O.B.C. certificate from the accused No. 1. Thereafter, the complainant went to the office of accused No. 1 at Bechri Grampanchayat, where the accused No. 1 verified the papers and filled the details in form of panchkyas and demanded Rs. 120/- from the complainant. On asking by the complainant, the accused told that your work cannot done free of cost and the accused No. 1 clarified that out of Rs. 120/-, Rs. 100/- was for the accused No. 1 and remaining Rs. 20/- was for the accused No. 2, who was peon at the said office of Grampanchayat. The complainant told the accused that he was studying and therefore, he was not having money and he would give the said amount later on and therefore, the complainant returned back the application along with copy of ration card. As per the case of the prosecution, on 14.2.1996, the complainant met the accused No. 1 and the accused No. 1 told him to come with income certificate of his father along with sum of Rs. 120/-. As the complainant was not willing to give such amount for illegal gratification to the accused, the complainant approached the ACB Office, at Nadiad, on 19.2.1996. After following necessary formalities and after taking complaint of the complainant, the ACB officer called the panchas from the office of the Assistant Inspector of Electric Department and the said panchas were explained about the anthracene powder and experiment of ultra violet lamp and other procedure. The ACB officer also explained the complainant as to how and when give the amount to the accused. Thereafter, preliminary panchnama was prepared at ACB office and then the members of raiding party, complainant along with panchas proceeded to the Bechri Grampanchayat. After reaching at the office of Bechri Grampanchayat, the complainant and panch No. 1 went inside the office, where both the accused were present. The complainant handed over the papers to the accused No. 1 and after perusing the papers, the accused No. 1 told the complainant to call his father. Upon being asked, the complainant produced School Leaving Certificate. After verification, the accused No. 1 made endorsement on the backside of the application and instructed the complainant to give Rs. 120/- to accused No. 2. Out of the said amount of Rs. 120/-, Rs. 20/- was to be given to the accused No. 2 and therefore, the complainant gave Rs. 20/- to the accused No. 2 and then the complainant gave pre-arranged signal to the members of raiding party and therefore, they rushed to the spot and on carrying out search, Rs. 20/- was recovered from the accused No. 2. There were stains of anthracene powder found on the pocket, shirt and hand of the accused No. 2 during the experiment of ultra violate lamp. The shirt of the accused No. 2 was seized and seizure memo was prepared and panchnama was drawn. Thereafter, the complaint was registered against the accused persons for the offences punishable under Sections 7, 12 and 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, The Investigating Officer carried out further investigation, recorded the panchnama and obtained requisite sanction.