STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. SHAM NAMDEV SONAWANE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The State has filed this appeal against the judgment and order passed by the Special Judge, Thane, in Special Case no. 4 of 1984. By the said judgment and order dated 28-1-1988, the Special Judge, Thane, acquitted the accused of the offences punishable under section 161 of the Indian penal Code read with section 5 (1) (d) r/w section 5 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption act.

(2.) The prosecution case in brief is that Shri. Sham Namdev Sonawane was working as Forester in Dugar Forest Round in Bhiwandi range. He was residing in the official quarters given to him at village Waret. According to the prosecution, Vinayak motiram Kadam was working as Primary teacher at village Ghotgaon. His wife was also working as a Primary Teacher in the same village. He purchased a plot of land on 3-1-1983 and intended to construct a house on the said plot. He also purchased a cattle shed from one Ladyaka Thakare - P. W. 4, which was situated at a distance of 1 km. from his house in the house of Kadam. P. W. 2-Kadam made an application for demolishing cattle shed on 10-3-1983 to the Range Forest officer, Bhiwandi. In the said application he made a request to the Range Forest Officer to make a panchanama in respect of valuation of the cattle shed. Before any order was passed on the said application, P. W. 2 -Kadam demolished the cattle shed and transported its timber to village Ghotgaon in two bullock carts and dumped the pieces of the timber in the nearing house. Thereafter, he made enquiry with the Range Forest officer and on 14-3-1983 he was informed that his application had been allowed. He accordingly met the accused and requested him to make panchanama of the timber of the cattle shed. Prosecution case is that the accused demanded Rs. 1,000/- for making panchanama as it was demolished without any permission or intimation to the Forest Office. Accordingly, on the next day, i. e. 15-3-1983 he went to the house of P. W. 2- Kadam along with other forest officers and had lunch at the place of P. W. 2- Kadam. After accused demanded Rs. 1,000/- from P. W. 2, P. W. 2 called his landlord Kisan Patil. Thereafter p. W. 2-Kadam brought the amount of rs. 1,000/- and handed over the same to Kisan patil who counted it and returned the amount to Kadam, who thereafter paid the same to the accused. Prosecution case is that the accused informed P. W. 2 - Kadam that he would issue receipt for the said payment later on.

(3.) According to the prosecution, one of the forest guards - Gavhane asked the accused to issue receipt for payment of rs. 1,000/- made by Kadam. The accused refused to do so and there was quarrel between the two. Thereafter complaint was filed by P. W. 9-Gavhane to the District Forest officer who directed that enquiry be made in the allegation made against the accused. Accordingly, statements were recorded and complaint was filed against the accused. Ultimately, permission of the Judicial magistrate was obtained to investigate the complaint and sanction to prosecute was also granted by P. W. 8- Chief Conservator of forest and charge-sheet was thereafter filed against the accused.