NARAYAN Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal appeal takes exception to the judgment dated 30/11/2001 passed by the Special Judge, Nagpur in Special Case No. 30/1991 by which appellant/accused is convicted for the offence punishable under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay fine of Rs. 500/- and in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for four months. The appellant is also convicted for the offence under Section 13(1)(d) punishable under Section 13(2) of the said Act and is sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay fine of Rs. 500/- and in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for six months. The prosecution case can be briefly stated as under:

(2.) According to prosecution, about four months thereafter the complainant visited appellant along with signatures on the notices when appellant demanded him Rs. 450/-. However, the said amount was not carried by the complainant and he still insisted the appellant to issue 7/12 extract as he was badly in need of the same. However, appellant refused to issue the same saying that unless Rs. 450/- were paid, he would not issue 7/12 extract. It is the further case of the prosecution that after some days, village Kotwal came to the complainant and informed him that he was called by the Talathi (appellant). 10-15 days thereafter the appellant visited village Asola when complainant met him and again requested him for 7/12 extract, upon which appellant informed complainant that he had already sent notices for obtaining signatures of other co-owners and told complainant to contact him after receipt of the notices duly signed by them with Rs. 450/-, else it would not be possible for him to complete the work, upon which complainant returned home.

(3.) Lastly, on 8/4/1991, complainant met appellant while he was proceeding to village Hingna. According to prosecution, during this meeting appellant asked complainant to pay Rs. 450/- for issuing 7/12 extract. However, on that day also, complainant was not having said amount and thus, informed the appellant that he would arrange for said amount within 2-3 days, upon which appellant informed complainant to come to his office with said amount on Wednesday when he would issue 7/12 extract. As the complainant was not interested to make payment of the said amount, on 10/4/1991, he lodged complaint against appellant with the Office of Anti Corruption Bureau.