JALAMSING SURATSING SENGAR Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this appeal, the appellant has challenged the judgment and order of the learned Special Judge, Ahmedabad dated 31st August, 1993 passed in Special Case No.3 of 1991 whereby the trial Court convicted the appellant, herein, for the offence punishable under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act and sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of two years and to pay fine of Rs.500/- and in case of default to undergo further imprisonment for a period of three months. The appellant was also convicted for the offence punishable under Section 13(1)(d)(i) and (ii) and Section 13(2)of the Prevention of Corruption Act and sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of two years and to pay fine of Rs.500/- and in case of default to undergo further imprisonment for a period of three months. The aforesaid sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) The brief facts giving rise to the present appeal are that one Bhanabhai Govabhai Chauhan-original complainant-P.W.-1, herein, at the relevant point of time, was residing at Behrampura, Nr. Calico Mill's Chawl, Jamalpur area and he used to ply hired auto-rickshaw. P.W.-1 used to stand near gate of A.P.M.C., in Jamalpur area of Ahmedabad with his auto-rickshaw and pick passengers from there. It was the case of the prosecution before the trial Court that the original accused-the appellant, herein, used to collect Rs.2/- from P.W.-1 and other auto-rickshaw drivers for allowing them to carry passengers with stock of vegetables in their passenger auto-rickshaws. It was further case of the prosecution that whenever any auto-rickshaw driver denied to pay Rs.2/- to the appellant, the appellant used to abuse him by using filthy language and used to throw out stock of vegetables of passenger from the auto-rickshaw of such auto-rickshaw driver. The appellant had also extracted amount of Rs.2/- from P.W.-1 on several occasions. Hence, being aggrieved with the same, P.W.-1 decided to lodge a complaint with the Anti Corruption Bureau, Ahmedabad.

(3.) Mr. Abhichandani, learned Advocate for the appellant has submitted that the trial Court ought to have held that the amount of Rs.16/- recovered from the pocket of the pant of the appellant, including the currency note of Rs.2/- smeared with anthracene powder, was the balance amount, out of Rs.20/- given by the appellant to the tea stall owner, towards the payment of price of tea.