SHARAD WAMAN BUCHAKE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal raises certain important issues that have arisen for the first time and which therefore require adjudication. They are summarised as follows :

(2.) IT is necessary to first refer briefly to the relevant facts. The appellant, an employee of the Central Railway was at the relevant time working at Solapur as an Unloading Foreman. It is alleged that on 4 -5 -1988 while unloading wagon 33577 containing 1987 cement bags, the accused is alleged to have been responsible for diverting 13 of those cement bags, which were kept aside and that he thereafter lodged a complaint to the effect that these 13 bags were received short. The matter was being investigated into by the complainant Sarkate who was the R.P.F. Inspector and it is alleged that the accused met him on three occasions and requested him not to report anything adverse for which purpose he would pay him Rs. 4,000/ -. Sarkate refused to do anything other than what was required under the Rules and Sarkate alleges that he also refused to accept any money from the accused. He, therefore, went to the Anti -Corruption Bureau authorities on 9 -5 -1988 and lodged a complaint wherein he stated that the accused had indicated his intention to come to the R.P.F. Office at about 7.00 p.m. that evening and that he was insisting on offering a bribe of Rs. 4,000/ - which Sarkate had refused to accept. The Anti -Corruption Bureau Inspector Kadam recorded the complaint and sent for two panchas Shirke and Potdar.

(3.) ONE of these persons namely Potdar accompanied Sarkate to his office and it is alleged that the accused came there at about 7.45 p.m. along with the Superintendent of his Department. He is alleged to have once again conveyed his request to Sarkate to hush up the matter and showed the amount of Rs. 4,000/ - which he took out from his pocket and he thereafter opened the right side drawer of Sarkate's table and put the money into the drawer. It is material to state that even on this occasion Sarkate is alleged to have clearly told him that he will not budge from his line of duty and that he will follow the requirements of the Rules. On a signal being given by Sarkate, Inspector Kadam and the raiding party came inside and apprehended the accused. They recovered the money from the drawer and drew up the requisite panchnama. On completion of the investigation the accused was put on trial before the learned Special Judge, Solapur who convicted him for the offence punishable under section 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act and awarded him a sentence of rigorous imprisonment of one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/ - in default rigorous imprisonment for three months. It is against this conviction that the present appeal has been directed.