SURESH Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved by the recording of conviction for the offences punishable under section 7 and 13 (1) (d) read with section 13 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, vide judgement and order dated 9th June, 2000, passed by the learned Special Judge, Latur in Special Case No. 4/1992, the present appeal is preferred by the original accused. He was sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay fine of Rs. 500/- for the offence punishable under section 7 while sentence of rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay fine of Rs. 500/- for the offence punishable under section 13 (1) (d) read with section 13 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act was awarded to him. Hence, the present appeal.

(2.) The prosecution case, in short, is as under:-

(3.) PW 8 Laxman Wadje, the police inspector of Anti Corruption Bureau, Latur conducted the investigation in the said complaint. He sent a letter to the Government Polytechnic college for sending two employees as panch witnesses. Accordingly, two panch witnesses, including PW2 Sudhir Pande were sent by the Principal of the said college to the Anti Corruption Bureau. The pre-trap exercise of reading over the complaint, demonstration of anthracene powder, application of anthracene powder to the decoy money i.e. five notes in the denomination of Rs. 100/- each was carried. The serial numbers of the notes were recorded in the panchanama. The decoy money was placed in the watch-pocket of the complainant. The complainant and the shadow panch witnesses were asked to go together to the spot. The rest of the raiding party followed them. The predetermined signal to be given, upon acceptance of the decoy money, was already settled.