RAMESHCHANDRA AMBARAM SADHU Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present appeal has been filed by the appellant under Section 374 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 against the judgment and order of conviction dated 14.07.2003 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.2, Mehsana in Special (ACB) Case No.9 of 1993, whereby the appellant -accused was convicted of the charge for offence punishable under Sections 7, 13(1)(D)(1)(2)(3) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act" for short) and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years with fine of Rs.1000/ - and in default, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment of six months. The sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) THE brief facts of the prosecution case are that complainant -Babubhai Fuljibhai Desai, a resident of Desai Vado, Kheralu, was carrying on business of Lijjat Papad and Sasa Detergent Powder as their agents. It is further case of the prosecution that a scheme of free land to the small landholders/agriculturists was introduced on 1983/84 by the Government. Under the said scheme, the complainant's father and himself and his two brothers had applied for availing the said plots. It is further case of the prosecution that their applications were approved and therefore, for the construction over the plot, a property card was required. Therefore, an application prior to 13.12.1992, i.e. before 25 days, was given to the appellant, and it is alleged that to issue the property card earlier, the appellant had demanded Rs.500/ -. It is the further case of the prosecution that on 28.12.1992, while passing through the complainant's shop, the appellant had told him that all the property card were ready and he should pay him Rs.500/ - to get the same. It is further case of the prosecution that the complainant should go to the office of the appellant with money. It is further case of the prosecution that the complainant did not like to pay Rs.500/ -. Therefore, he approached the ACB Office, Mehsana to lay the trap against the present appellant. Two panchas were called from the R.T.O., Mehsana and they were introduced with the complainant. After the following necessary procedure, the aforesaid aspect was verified and a trap was arranged, wherein the accused -appellant herein, was caught red -handed.

(3.) AFTER completion of the investigation, the chargesheet was filed before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.2, which was, thereafter, numbered as Special (ACB) Case No.9 of 1993.