RANGNATH Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The judgment and order passed by learned Special Judge, Osmanabad in Special Case (AC) No. 12 of 1999 is hereby taken exception to by original accused who stood convicted by the judgment and order dtd. 30/6/2005 for offence punishable under Ss. 7 and 13(1)(d) r/w 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 [PC Act]. PROSECUTION IN TRIAL COURT IS ON FOLLOWING FACTS

(2.) Accused, who joined services in Education Department, was promoted from class IV cadre to class III cadre and he was assigned the work of collecting admission fees of students, to make distribution of scholarship, to prepare and issue bonafide certificates, leaving certificates and as such, he was a public servant. One Sulakshana i.e. sister of complainant submitted application for seeking admission to D.Ed. Course. On 15/8/1999, her brother i.e. complainant Dayanand visited the office of accused to verify the selection list and there he came in contact with accused and also made inquiry with respect to the procedure for getting specific training center at Tuljapur. According to prosecution, accused assured to do the needful but on paying bribe of Rs.7,000.00. Accused assured complainant that he need not meet anyone and that on payment, his sister would be getting admission at Tuljapur training center. After negotiations, demand was brought down from Rs.7,000.00 to Rs.5,000.00. On 18/8/1999, complainant and his sister remained present for facing interview. There again accused asked complainant as to whether he has brought amount. Complainant answered that he could not arrange whole amount of Rs.5,000.00 but has brought Rs.2,000.00, upon which accused told to pay at least Rs.4,000.00. Complainant assured him that he will arrange remaining Rs.2,000.00 till the evening. Thereafter Sulakshana was called for interview. However, there was some defect in the certificate appended by her regarding she to be under the category of daughter of Ex-Serviceman. Complainant went to the concerned office, got the certificate rectified. That time, complainant was assured by the accused that on payment of remaining amount of Rs.2,000.00, work would be done.

(3.) As complainant was not willing to pay any illegal gratification, he approached Anti Corruption Bureau [ACB] authorities, who entertained his complaint. Pancha was arranged, complaint was got verified and after drawing pre-trap panchanama, pancha was made to accompany complainant. There were directions to the complainant to hand over money on demand and pancha to watch it. As planned, they reached office of R.P. Collage, Osmanabad and entered the premises. Thereafter complainant, pancha and accused all came out of the institute and proceeded to a hotel. Demand was made. Complainant handed over the tainted currency and thereafter gave pre-planned signal and thereafter accused was apprehended by ACB authorities, who carried out further procedure of lodging complaint.