VINUBHAI PETERBHAI CHRISTI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant has been convicted under Sections 7,13(1)(d)(i)(ii) and (iii) read with Section 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 by the impugned judgment dated 28.7.2000. By Such impugned judgment, Special Judge of Ahmedabad City Sessions Court has awarded sentence of 7 months rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.500/ - and simple imprisonment of 15 days in default of payment of such fine for offence under Section 7 of the Act, whereas one year R.I. with fine of Rs.750/ - and in default of payment of such fine, R.I. of one month for the offence under Sections 7,13(1)(d)(i)(ii) and (iii) read with Section 13(2) of the Act.

(2.) Sum and substance of the prosecution case before Special Judge, emerging from charge -sheet at Exh.4 dated 25.1.2000, is to the effect that Sureshgiri Dhanrajgiri Goswami, who is practicing advocate, has inquired about requisite certificate regarding registration of firm, namely 'Khodiyar Mitra Mandal' on 20.9.1996. Thereupon, it is alleged that the accused has demanded an amount of Rs.750/ - towards illegal gratification and bribe and after much discussion between both of them, the accused has agreed to accept Rs.600/ -. Thereupon on 21.9.1996, the complainant has to pay such amount of bribe in the office of the accused with declaration of partners of the firm. However, since the complainant does not want to pay bribe, he has lodged a complaint with ACB office, which has arranged a trap on 21.9.1996. The story and history regarding registration of complaint till actual date are stereotype and it does not require to be reproduced in detail when it is well discussed in the impugned judgment, more particularly when it does not change the consideration regarding confirmation of conviction of the appellant.

(3.) Thereafter on 21.11.1996, as contended by the complainant, he reached to the office of the accused with requisite papers regarding declaration and amount of bribe and again discussed with the accused regarding the amount of bribe requesting that it is too much and therefore, it is the say of the complainant that the accused has agreed to accept Rs.500/ - and thereupon both had reached to tea stall outside the office where the complainant had tried to handover the amount of bribe in the form of Rs.500/ - in presence of panch witness No.1 but the accused has asked him to place it in a register kept on his desk and therefore, it is alleged that the complainant has paid such amount as demanded and thereby the accused has committed offence for which he is convicted as recorded hereinabove.