PRAKASHCHANDRA SHANKARBHAI PATEL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both these appeals arise out of the same incident and involve common questions of law and facts and hence, they are being decided by this common judgment.

(2.) Criminal Appeal No.550 of 1998 is preferred by the appellant ­ Prakashchandra Shankarbhai Patel - original accused No.1 and Criminal Appeal No.618 of 1998 is preferred by Yasinkhan Rasulkhan Pathan ­ original accused No.2 against the judgment and order dated 12.6.1998 passed in Special (ACB) Case No.6 of 1994 by learned Special Judge, Nadiad whereby both the original accused were convicted for the offence under sections 7, 13(1)(d), (i)(ii)(iii) read with section 13(2) and 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act 1988 ("the Act" for short) and section 161 of IPC and sentenced to undergo two years rigorous imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs.2000/-, in default, to undergo further three months simple imprisonment for each of the offences and the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

(3.) The short facts giving rise to the present appeal are that accused No.1 was serving as Maintenance Surveyor at Sarsa, Taluka Anand, whereas accused No.2 was Peon in the said office. It is alleged that the complainant who was resident of Chaklasi met accused No.1 for getting transferred the name from his father to his brother Maiyuddin. The complainant met accused No.1 along with his brother and tendered the application along with requisite writing of family settlement. It is alleged that at that time, accused No.1 directed the complainant to talk with accused No.2 wherein accused No.2 demanded illegal gratification of Rs.2000/- for changing the name. It is alleged that the said amount of illegal gratification was scaled down to Rs.800/- and the complainant was directed to remain present along with demanded amount on 18.8.1993. As the complainant was not willing to pay the said amount of bribe, he lodged the complaint. On 18.8.1993 accused No.1 was absent and, therefore, on 19.8.1993 trap was laid and during the course of trap, accused No.2 was caught red handed along with tainted currency notes and, thereby, the accused committed the offence, as alleged.