MAFAJI SHIVAJI LAKUM (DARBAR) Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant has preferred the present appeal under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the judgment and order of conviction dated 18/01/2005 rendered by the learned Special Judge (ACB), Mehsana in Special (ACB) Case No.17 of 2001 whereby the appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years and fine of Rs.1,000/- and in default to pay fine, to under go three months rigorous imprisonment. The appellant has been further convicted for the offence punishable under Section 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years and six months and fine of Rs.1,000/- and in default to pay fine, to under go three months rigorous imprisonment. It is also ordered to run both the sentences concurrently.

(2.) The short facts giving rise to the present appeal are that the complainant is resident of village Gerita (Kolavada), Taluka Vijapur and he wanted a agriculture electricity connection at his agriculture farm for which he met one Maganbhai Shivrambhai Patel of his village who agreed to give electricity connection for Rs.15,000/- and for the said work, application was required to be made and seal and signature of Talati-cum-Mantri of the village panchayat was needed as per the rules of electricity company and therefore, the complainant met the present accused who was at the relevant time was working as Talati-cum-Mantri of the said village and the accused demanded Rs.500/- for seal and signature over the said paper as amount of illegal gratification. As the complainant was not willing to pay such bribe, he lodged a complaint before the ACB office, Mehsana. Accordingly, a trap was arranged and on the day of trap i.e. on 29/08/2001, the accused was caught red handed along with tainted currency notes and thereby committed an offence as alleged. Hence, a complaint came to be lodged against the appellant-accused.

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