RASIKLAL INDRABHAN PATWA Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In both these appeals, there is challenge to the judgment and order dtd. 29/11/2004 passed by the learned Special Judge, Aurangabad in Special Case No.1 of 2000 thereby convicting Rasiklal (appellant in Criminal Appeal No.812 of 2004) for offence punishable under Ss. 7, 13(1)(d) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act (PC Act) and convicting Balaprasad (appellant in Criminal Appeal No.813 of 2004) for offence under Sec. 12 of the PC Act.

(2.) Appellant Rasiklal Patwa and appellant Balaprasad Tiwari, who are Junior Engineer and Line Helper respectively were chargesheeted for commission of offence punishable under Ss. 7, 13(1)(d) r/w 13(2) and 12 r/w 7 respectively of the PC Act on the premise that they demanded and accepted Rs.1,000.00 by way of illegal gratification from complainant PW2 Shaikh Jalil for changing meters of his S.T.D. Booth shop and Juice Center.

(3.) Pointing to the evidence of prosecution, Mr.Barlota, learned Counsel for appellant Rasiklal would submit that prosecution has miserably failed to establish the charges beyond reasonable doubt. That at the outset there was no demand of illegal gratification. That amount demanded was towards deposit for changing faulty meters. Secondly, complainant was at arrears towards electricity charges and he was asked to clear the same. That there was uninterrupted supply of electricity to the shops of complainant and he has admitted to that extent. Therefore, there was no question of putting up any demand.