MANSARAM DAMU AHIRE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Appellant has challenged the Judgment and order dtd. 03/05/2012 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge–2, Niphad, in Special Case No.01 of 2007. By the impugned Judgment and order, the Appellant was convicted for commission of offence punishable U/s.7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (for short 'P. C. Act') and was sentenced to suffer R.I. for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.1000.00 and in default of payment of fine to suffer R.I. for two months. The Appellant was also convicted for commission of offence punishable U/s.13(1)(d) r/w. 13(2) of P.C. Act. He was sentenced to suffer R.I. for one year and Gokhale to pay a fine of Rs.1000.00 and in default of payment of fine to suffer R.I. for two months. Both the sentences were directed to run concurrently.

(2.) The prosecution case is that the complainant Dattu Gawali was having dispute with his brother's family in respect of two adjoining lands in Gat No.231 belonging to himself and Gat No.230 belonging to his brother at Kolgaon, Taluka Niphad, District Nashik. On 11/05/2006, there was an incident wherein his brother's family had manhandled, abused and beaten him. The complainant, in this case, Dattu Gawali had gone to Lasalgaon police station and lodged the complaint with the present Appellant who was Head Constable attached to Lasalgaon police station. It is his case that, on that day, he had demanded Rs.2000.00 for taking action on his complaint and he had actually accepted it. It is further case of the complainant that, on 19/06/2006 when the complainant had gone to Lasalgaon police station, he was kept in lock-up for some time. The Appellant demanded Rs.1000.00 for taking his side and not taking action against him. The complainant approached A.C.B., Nashik, gave his complaint, procedure for laying trap was completed and on 21/06/2006, in the evening, the trap was laid. The complainant and the pancha went to Lasalgaon police station followed by A.C.B. officers. The Appellant accepted two notes of Rs.500.00. He was caught. Post trap panchanama was recorded and the investigation was carried out. The appellant faced the trial before the Sessions Court at Nashik and at the conclusion of the trial, he was convicted and sentenced as mentioned earlier.

(3.) During trial, the prosecution examined 4 witnesses. PW-1 Dattu Gawali was the complainant, PW-2 Dhananjay Ahire was a pancha witness, PW-3 Dr. Nikhil Gupta was the sanctioning authority and PW-4 Shantaram Awasare, Dy. S.P. was the Investigating officer. The defence of the appellant was of denial. His further contention was that the complainant was under impression that, the Appellant was taking side of his opponents and, therefore, he was falsely implicated by the complainant. At the time of trap, there was no electricity supply and, therefore, everything related to testing of notes and clothes under the Ultraviolet lamp is a falsity. After considering the defence of the appellant and submissions, learned trial Judge believed the prosecution case, discrepancies in the depositions of the witnesses were brushed aside on the ground that the witnesses were deposing after a gap of almost 6 years and, therefore, they were not expected to depose regarding the minor details. It was also observed that the sanction was properly accorded. All the witnesses were believed. Even the motive for demand of money was believed. Therefore, learned Judge recorded his conclusion.