STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. MANGUBEN GORDHANBHAI VASAVA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant has preferred the present appeal under section 378 (1) (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the judgment and order of acquittal dated 10.03.2016, rendered by learned Special (ACB) Judge, Dahod in Special (ACB) Case No. 04 of 2012, whereby the present respondent - accused has been acquitted from commission of the offences punishable under Sections 7, 13 (1) (d) read with 13 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (for short "the Act").

(2.) The short facts giving rise to the present appeal are that complainant - Surekhaben Somabhai Machhar was working as an Aanganvadi Worker at Barsaleda and the present respondent - accused was the Child Development Programme Officer. While inspecting the aforesaid center of Aanganvaadi on 15.03.2012, the present respondent - accused inquired about the registers, gas bottle and other materials. At that time, the complainant replied that the said articles were kept at her home, due to which, she got angry upon the complainant and the present respondent - accused threatened her to take action against her and demanded Rs.5,000/- from the complainant for not taking any action against her. Out of the said amount, the complainant handed over Rs.3,000/- on 18.03.2012 and the present respondent - accused directed the complainant to pay the remaining amount on 29.03.201 Since the complainant did not desire to give any amount to the present respondent - accused, the complainant approached the ACB office. After the complainant lodged the complaint, necessary formalities in respect of trap were carried out at ACB Office and the trap was arranged. The present respondent - accused was caught red handed while accepting bribe. Hence, the complaint came to be lodged against the present respondent - accused for the offence punishable under Sections 7, (13) (1) (d) read with 13 (2) 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 present appellant - accused. The charge was framed against the accused. The accused pleaded not guilty to the charge and claimed to be tried.