TAKHATSINH MAKHUBHAI PARMAR Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal filed under section <a style="color: #3300FF; text-decoration: none" class="section-text" onmouseover="getSectionText(this);" href="ACA226">374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is directed against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.24, Ahmedabad, on 26.5.1998, in Special Case No.23 of 1994, whereby the accused-appellant has been found guilty of commission of the offences under Section <a style="color: #3300FF; text-decoration: none" class="section-text" onmouseover="getSectionText(this);" href="ACA153">7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (for short "the Act") and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay fine of Rs.1000/- and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for three months and under Section 13(1)(d) read with Section 13 (2) of the Act and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay fine of Rs.1000/- and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for three months.

(2.) According to the prosecution, the accused-appellant was, at the relevant point of time, serving in Gujarat State Civil Supplies Corporation. In the year 1994, a complaint was filed before ACB, Ahmedabad, by one Manish Jagdish Patel working in Mahavir Rice and Pulse Mill against the appellant alleging that the appellant had demanded gratification other than legal remuneration in respect of official act and that the appellant had committed criminal misconduct. Accordingly, a trap was arranged on 25.3.1994 whereby the appellant-accused demanded an illegal gratification of Rs.1100/- and the complainant delivered the said amount and the appellant-accused was caught red-handed by the ACB officials and raiding party. The tainted currency notes were recovered from the possession of the accused-appellant.

(3.) After preparing panchnamas and seizure memo, statement of various witness were recorded and ultimately charge-sheet was filed against the accused-appellant and on completion of investigation after obtaining necessary sanction from the Competent Authority, a case was registered as Special Case No.23 of 1994 and trial was initiated against the accused-appellant. To prove the case, the prosecution examined several witnesses and also produced several documentary evidence. At the end of trial after recording the statement of the accused-appellant under section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and after hearing arguments on behalf of prosecution and defence, the learned trial Court convicted and sentenced the accused-appellant for the charges levelled against him by judgment and order dated 25.5.1998. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the said judgment and order of conviction passed by the trial Court, the accused-appellant has preferred the present appeal.