ROHIDAS GULABDAS GAVHANE Vs. THE STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants have preferred the present appeal under section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the judgment and order of conviction dated 04/12/2004 rendered by the learned Special Judge, Navsari in Special (Corruption) Case No.4 of 2004 whereby the appellants have been convicted for the offence punishable under Sections 7, 12, 13(1)(d) read with section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The appellant no.1-accused no.1 is sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years and fine of Rs. 3,000/- and in default to pay fine, simple imprisonment for a period of six months for the offence punishable under section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The appellant no.1-accused no.1 is also sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years and fine of Rs. 3,000/- and in default to pay fine, simple imprisonment for a period of six months for the offence punishable under section 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The appellant no.2-accused no.2 is sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and fine of Rs. 1,000/- and in default to pay fine, simple imprisonment for a period of three months for the offence punishable under section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The appellant no.2-accused no.2 is also sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and fine of Rs. 1,000/- and in default to pay fine, simple imprisonment for a period of three months for the offence punishable under section 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. For both the accused, it is also ordered to run both the sentence concurrently.

(2.) The short facts giving rise to the present appeal are that PW-4 Mr. R. D. Marathe, Police Inspector, ACB, Valsad received information that the accused and other traffic police officials used to collect amount of illegal gratification from the plier of vehicle who were entering into the city of Navsari from Surat and therefore he arranged for a trap. During the course of running trap, while PW-1 was driving his vehicle within the vicinity of Viraval, at that time, the accused intercepted him and asked certain questions and for carrying out passengers in the goods vehicle and for not taking any legal actions like issuance of memo, in lieu thereof, demanded and accepted Rs. 50/- and thereby committed an offence punishable under Sections 7, 12, 13(1)(d) read with section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Hence, the complaint came to be lodged against the appellants-accused.

(3.) In pursuance of the complaint, the Investigating Officer carried out the investigation and filed the charge-sheet against the appellants-accused. The charge was framed against the accused. The accused pleaded not guilty to the charge and claimed to be tried.