STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. MASU KRISHNA CHAVAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal impugning an order and judgment dated 2 nd June 2003 passed by the Special Judge, Kolhapur, acquitting the accused of offences punishable under Section 7 (Public servant taking gratification other than legal remuneration in respect of an official act), Section 13 (1) (d), 13 (2) and Section 12 (Punishment for abetment of offences defined in section 7 or 11) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (PC Act).

(2.) It is prosecution's case that complainant - Pandit Bhausaheb Ranadiwe (PW-1) was having agricultural land of 1 Acre 30 Gunthas at Kasaba Bawada. His brother also has a share in that land. Another land admeasuring 30 R was in cultivation by his father as a tenant. His father died on 11th December 1993. His brother Shamrao Bhausaheb Ranadiwe and complainant were cultivating this tenanted land separately. After the death of the father, complainant gave an application on 26th December 1993, i.e., 15 days after the death of his father, in Tahasil office at Karvir for entering his name as tenant in the tenanted land. PW-1 also gave an application in Gav Chavadi on 29th December 1993 for entering his name in the ancestral land as an owner. Notices were issued from Kasaba Chavadi to the original land lady Shobha Divate and complainant. Their statements were recorded and the Circle Officer sent proceedings to Tahasildar, Karvir, giving favourable remark in favour of complainant. It appears that this favourable remark was given without demanding any bribe amount because there is no such allegation about that. The mother and brother of complainant, however, raised objection to record the name of complainant only in the records of rights of those lands and hence, the proceeding was remanded to Circle Officer for recording statements of concerned parties. Complainant received letter dated 30th March 1995 to that effect.

(3.) It seems PW-1 went to Circle Office and met M.K. Chavan, accused no.1, who was working as Circle Officer at the relevant time. Accused no.1 told complainant (PW-1) that notices will have to be issued and all concerned parties will have to be summoned. Accordingly, PW-1 received notice on 31st August 1995 in connection with tenanted land and another notice dated 5th October 1995 in connection with ancestral land for recording his statement. Complainant went to the office of Circle Officer and his statements were recorded. Thereafter, accused no.1 asked complainant to come after 4 days after which, the matter will be referred to Tahasil office. Accordingly, complainant met accused no.1 after 4 to 5 days. At that time, accused no.1 again asked complainant to come on some other day. PW-1 then met accused no.1 after 8 to 10 days at Kasaba Bawada Chavadi at which time accused no.1 informed PW-1 that he has to pay bribe of Rs.2000/- as two entries are to be effected, one in respect of ancestral land and another in respect of tenanted land. PW-1 informed accused no.1 that his financial position is weak and accused should reduce the amount. On 10th November 1995, PW-1 met accused no.1 at Kasaba Bawada Chavadi where accused no.1 asked whether he has brought the money. PW-1 requested accused no.1 to reduce the amount and finally accused no.1 agreed to accept Rs.1000/- and only on payment of that amount, he would send the papers for sanction to the higher authority. Therefore, PW-1 approached Anti Corruption Bureau and narrated his grievance to the Anti Corruption Officer. After the usual procedures, accused no.1 accepted the bribe amount of Rs.1000/- through accused no.2 on 15th November 1995, as a motive for reward for showing favour in the exercise of official function to the said complainant for the purpose of effecting mutation entry in his name for the ancestral land as well as tenanted land after the death of his father. Thereafter, raid was conducted and the Anti Corruption Officer - Mr. Vinayak Shivaram Tilekar filed complaint in Laxmipuri Police Station where the crime was registered against both the accused. After completion of investigation, papers were sent to Head Office of Anti Corruption Bureau at Pune for obtaining sanction from the Competent Authority. The Competent Authority accorded sanction on 13th August 1996, after which the chargesheet was filed on 29th October 1996. The accused pleaded not guilty to any of the charges and claimed to be tried. The defence is of total denial.