DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE Vs. R PARTHASARATHY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal against acquittal, filed by the State. The respondent is the sole accused in Spl.C.C.No.1 of 1999, on the file of the First Additional District and Sessions Court cum Chief Judicial Magistrate- Special Judge under the Prevention of Corruption Act, Madurai. He stood charged for offences under Sections 7 and 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The trial Court, by Judgment, dated 16.02.2001, acquitted the respondent. Challenging the same, the State is before this Court, with this appeal.

(2.) The case of the prosecution in brief is as follows: Between 15.02.1995 and 25.07.1995, the respondent was the Principal Revenue Officer in Madurai Corporation and between 26.07.1995 to 05.07.1996, he was the Municipal Executive Joint Director of the said Corporation. Thus, admittedly, he is a public servant, in terms of the Prevention of Corruption Act.

(3.) P.W.2, Mr.Antonyraj, wanted to erect a sign board, for which he was in need of licence from the Madurai Corporation. The respondent was the officer in charge of the said job. According to the case of the prosecution, for the purpose of issuing such licence, on 05.07.1996, at about 08.00 a.m., when P.W.2 met him at his house near Gandhi Museum at Madurai, he demanded Rs.3,000/- as illegal gratification. P.W.2 was not inclined to pay the same. Thereafter, on the same day at 10.45 a.m. he went to the office of the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vigilance and Anti-corruption, Madurai and made a complaint under Ex.P.4. Based on the same, P.W.8, the then Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vigilance and Anti Corruption, Madurai registered a case in Crime No.1 of 1996, under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Ex.P.5 is the First Information Report. Then, he forwarded Exs.P.4 and P.5 to the Court and took up the case for investigation.