LAWS(GJH)-2017-3-84

DILIPSINH BHIMSINH JADEJA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

Decided On March 20, 2017
Dilipsinh Bhimsinh Jadeja Appellant
V/S
STATE OF GUJARAT Respondents

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 09.08.2004, rendered by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court No.4), Bhavnagar in Special A.C.B. Case No. 08 of 1999, wherein the appellant was ordered to undergo simple imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000.00, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for further 30 days for the offence punishable under Sec. 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act and to undergo simple imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000.00, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for further 30 days for the offence punishable under Sec. 13 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act.

(2.) The short facts giving rise to the present Appeal are that the accused was serving as the Talati Cum Mantri at Village - Valukad, Taluka - Ghogha, District - Bhavnagar. For installation of Bio-Gas Plant under the supervision of complainant Labhubhai Jivrajbhai Savani, 19 persons filled-in their forms for the purpose of getting the signature and attestation by the accused. At that time, the accused demanded amount of Rs. 2,500.00 which was ultimately reduced to Rs.1,000.00 for putting signatures on the forms. As the complainant did not desire to give any amount to the accused towards the illegal gratification, he approached before the ACB Bhavnagar and filed his complaint on 24.05.1999. After following necessary formalities in respect of trap, the trap was conducted on 25.05.1999. The accused caught red handed along with tainted currency notes during the course of trap and thereby, committed the offence punishable under Sec. 7, 13 (1) (d) read with Sec. 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 accused. The charge was framed against the accused. The accused pleaded not guilty to the charge and claimed to be tried.