SUNITA DATTATRAY GOPEWAD Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this appeal, the appellant takes exception to the judgment and order dtd. 31/7/2024 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-1, Bhokar, in Special ACB Case No.02 of 2016, thereby recording guilt and convicting the appellant for offences under Ss. 7 and 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act.

(2.) The case was committed for trial. On appreciation of evidence, learned trial Judge recorded above conviction. The same is now taken exception to, by filing instant appeal.

(3.) Learned counsel for appellant-accused pleaded innocence and false implication. That, amount demanded was towards charges of copies and there was no demand of illegal gratification. That, initially sanction was not granted. That, there is no forensic report about voice sample. Further, learned counsel submits that, even otherwise, demand being of only Rupees Two Hundred, doctrine of triviality comes into play. Furthermore, there are contradictions between testimony of complainant and shadow pancha. That, specific grounds to that extent are raised in the appeal memo, more particularly, ground Nos. (x), (xvi) and (xviii). According to him, the case was not proved beyond reasonable doubt and thus he prays that appellant being a lady, deserves to be acquitted by allowing the appeal.