STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. ASHOK BALASAHEB NIMBALKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal impugning an order and judgment dtd. 20/9/2008 passed by the Special Judge, Satara, acquitting respondent (accused) of offences punishable under Sec. 7 ( Public servant taking gratification other than legal remuneration in respect of an official act), Sec. 13 (1) (d) read with Sec. 13 (2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (PC Act).

(2.) It is the case of appellant that accused was working as P.S.I. in Barad Police out post of Phaltan Police Station in August 2005. At that Police Station, a crime had been registered pursuant to an FIR filed by one Ramesh Kisan Makar against 18 individuals for various offences under the provisions of Indian Penal Code (IPC). Accused was investigating the matter. One Gulabrao Ramchandra Dadas, who is complainant (PW-1), had made a complaint to the DY. S.P., Anti Corruption Bureau, Satara on 29 th August 2005 about a demand for illegal gratification made by accused to him. According to PW-1, he had called upon accused to lodge a complaint against one Avin Arjun Makar having kidnapped a daughter of his relative Balu Bhiku Pokale. It is alleged that Balu Bhiku Pokale and some three to four persons had gone to the house of Arjun Makar on 27 th July 2005 to know the whereabouts of Pushpa, the daughter of Balu Bhiku Pokale, at which time an altercation took place and some persons from both the sides were injured. Arjun Makar registered a crime in Barad Police out post but the complaint of Balu Bhiku Pokale was not registered. About 15 persons from the side of Balu Bhiku Pokale were arrested and kept in jail.

(3.) It is alleged that PW-1 met accused in the evening of 26/8/2005 at Phaltan and learnt that the father of Balu Bhiku Pokale, i.e., Bhiku Laxman Pokale, who was 80 years old and two other old persons from his family, were likely to be arrested though they were not at all concerned with the incident that took place on 27 th July 2005. At that time, accused made a demand of Rs.25,000.00 as bribe if PW-1 did not want those three old relatives to be arrested. PW-1 then paid Rs.20,000.00 to accused with a promise to pay the balance Rs.5,000.00 later. Accused told PW-1 to bring the balance amount of Rs.5,000.00 to his house in the evening of 29/8/2005 at Phaltan. On 29 th August 2005 in the morning PW-1 spoke to accused over telephone at about 9.00 a.m. and asked at what time he should meet him at his residence. Accused told complainant (PW-1) to come at about 4.00 p.m. and if he did not pay that amount, accused will arrest those three persons.