STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. JAYANTILAL RANCHHODBHAI DHUVAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal against acquittal in a case where the prosecution alleges that the accused had demanded bribe and the same was paid. Money was recovered. After the trial, the learned Trial Judge has observed, while acquitting the accused, as under:

(2.) THE aforesaid conclusion clearly establishes that whatever money was paid was not pursuant to any demand. Unless there is a demand, the case of illegal gratification being accepted is not made out in law. That being the position, the learned trial Judge has acquitted the accused. We have been taken through the record. This is clearly being made out that the prosecution has miserably failed to establish that there was a demand of money and acceptance of illegal gratification. In the police statement of the complainant which has been put to him in cross -examination that he has not stated that money was demanded by the accused. Thus the demand was not the original case of the prosecution. That being the position, there was no demand as held by the learned trial Judge. If there was no demand then there cannot be any money paid for being converted for the use of the accused. That being the position, we do not find any reason to interfere with the findings recorded by the learned trial Judge in acquitting the accused. In the light of the above whether it could be said to be perverse in an appeal against acquittal unless the findings recorded by the learned trial Judge are perverse or so manifestly illegal that interference is called for by the appellate Court . We do not find any infirmity or illegality in the findings recorded by the trial Judge. Therefore no case for interference in appeal is made out.

(3.) LEARNED A.P.P. Mr. Maulik Nanavati has urged that since the money was demanded, under Section 20 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 the burden shifted on the accused to prove that there was no illegal gratification but then the complainant in his statement has alleged that it was not the demand then the burden itself gets discharged by the case of the prosecution itself.