PRAVINCHANDRA RATILAL MODI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants have preferred the aforementioned Appeals under section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the judgment and order of conviction dated 23.12.2003, rendered by the learned Special Judge, Ahmedabad City Civil Court No.6, Ahmedabad in Special Case No. 27 of 1998, wherein the appellants were ordered to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/-, in default, to undergo one month rigorous imprisonment for the offence punishable under Section 7 read with section 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 4,000/-, in default, to undergo two months rigorous imprisonment for the offence punishable under Section 13 (1) (d), (1) (2) (3) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

(2.) The short facts giving rise to the present Appeals are that the appellants - accused were serving as the officials in the Octroi Brach of Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation, Ahmedabad and they were looking after the assessment and valuation of goods for levying the octroi charges, whereas the complainant Nareshkumar Mavjibhai Patel was carrying on the business of manufacturing and selling electronic generator in the name of Sigma System. The present appellants - accused visited the office of the complainant and informed him that since the delivery place of his goods was Sarkhej, he failed to pay octroi of the said goods and was required to pay octroi of all the goods, delivery of which was taken at Sarkhej. Thereafter, the present appellants - accused, on two occasions, went to the shop of the complainant and demanded Rs. 9,000/- as bribe. As he was not willing to pay any amount to the complainant towards illegal gratification, he lodged the complaint before the ACB, Ahmedabad on 21.04.1998. After following necessary formalities in respect of trap, the trap was conducted. During the course of trap dated 21.04.1998, the accused no.3 demanded Rs. 9,000/- as the amount of illegal gratification which was accepted by the accused no.2 and after counting the said amount, the said amount came to be handed over to the accused no.1 and thereby, all the three accused committed the offence punishable under Section 7 read with Section 12 and 13 (1) (d) (1) (2) (3) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Hence, the complaint came to be lodged against the appellants - accused for the offence punishable under Sections 7 read with Section 12 and 13 (1) (d) (1) (2) (3) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

(3.) In pursuance of the complaint, the Investigating Officer carried out the investigation and filed the charge-sheet against the accused persons. The charge was framed against the accused persons. The accused pleaded not guilty to the charge and claimed to be tried. 3. 1 In order to bring home the guilt, the prosecution has examined four witnesses and also produced several documentary evidences. 3. 2 At the end of the trial, after recording the statement of the accused under section 313 of the CrPC, 1973 and hearing the arguments on behalf of the prosecution and the defence, learned trial Court delivered the judgment and order, as stated above.