PANDURANG DEVIDASRAO JOSHI Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant/original accused No. 1, who stands convicted for an offence punishable under section 7, 13(1)(d) read with section 13 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and sentenced to R.I. for one year and to pay fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default of which to undergo further R.I. for three months and R.I. for one year and to pay fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default of which to undergo further R.I. for three months, by the Additional Sessions Judge, Beed, by judgment dated 26.12.2000 in Special Case No. 69 of 1991, by this appeal questions the correctness of his conviction and sentence. During the pendency of this appeal the original appellant expired and his legal heirs were permitted to prosecute this appeal. Reference in this judgment to "appellant" means the original appellant/accused. Facts in brief as are necessary for the decision of this appeal may be stated thus:-

(2.) Accordingly, P.W.1 Popat and P.W.6 Ashruba proceeded to the office of the accused. The accused met them and informed them that he would come subsequently. Ashruba and Popat waited for the accused and after the arrival of the accused, Ashruba inquired with accused if his work is done and the accused replied in the affirmative. The accused also asked Ashruba if necessary amount had been brought and to pay it to original accused No. 2, who was a shop-keeper. The complainant Ashruba and P.W. I Popat accordingly proceeded to the shop of accused No. 2 and handed over an amount of Rs. 450/- to accused No. 2. On accused No. 2 accepting the marked currency notes, the agreed signal was given by P.W.6 Ashruba. Accordingly the members of the raiding party arrived at the shop and apprehended accused No. 2. Accused No. 2 was thereafter taken to the office of the accused No. 1 but the accused No. 1 was not present in his office. Certain documents from the office of the accused No. 1 were seized and a panchnama to that effect was drawn at Exh. 33.

(3.) A complaint was, therefore, lodged by P.W.7 Vikas Kohok. On the basis of the complaint of P.W.7 Vikas Kohok, P.W.3 Uttam registered an offence. Subsequent to the completion of investigation, a charge-sheet against the appellant and original accused No. 2 was filed.