MANJIBHAI DHARAMSINHBHAI JETPURA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal is preferred by the appellant-accused against the judgment and order dated 31.12.2002 passed by the learned Special Judge, Court No. 2, Ahmedabad City, in Special Case No. 1 of 1999 whereby the appellant has been convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months with fine of Rs.1000/- and, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for one month for the offence punishable under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 ('the Act' for short). The appellant has also been convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year with fine of Rs.2000/-, and in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for two months for the offence punishable under Section 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Act. Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) The short facts giving rise to the present case are that the complainant approached the accused for getting mutation entry entered in the name of his mother. At that time, the accused demanded Rs. 750/- for making provisional entry in the name of his mother-Kamlaben. As he was not having Rs. 750 with him, he called his brother-in-law Dharmesh Madhavlal Patel and borrowed Rs. 750/ from him. He gave Rs. 750/- to the accused and he accepted the said amount in presence of Dharmesh. Thereafter, on 6.06.1998 when he visited the office of the accused for getting Village Form Nos. 7/12 and 6, at that time, accused further demanded Rs. 750/-. The complainant told that he was having Rs.300/- and assured him that he would pay remaining amount of Rs. 450/-. The accused accepted Rs.300/- and directed that the remaining amount Rs. 450/- was required to be paid when he delivers such copies. As the complainant was not willing to pay the said amount of illegal gratification to the accused, he lodged a complaint and in pursuance of the said complaint, a trap came to be laid by the officials of Anti Corruption Bureau and the accused was caught red handed along with tainted currency notes and thereby committed offences punishable under Sections 7, 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the Act.

(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.