RAMESH RATANRAO THAKUR Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is preferred by the appellant-accused against the order of his conviction and sentence dated 8th March, 1989 passed by the learned Special Judge, Dhule, in Special Case No. 2 of 1984.

(2.) THE prosecution case, in brief, is that the appellant-accused was working as Assistant Project Officer for Industries at Dhule. The Central Government had introduced a scheme known as Training of Rural Youths for self-employment under which the idea was to give some training to the male and female members especially from villages to enable them to have their own means of livelihood. The said scheme was introduced in Dhule District and was being implemented through the District Rural Development Agency. One Kalawati, wife of Harishchandra Wankhede, was conducting tailoring classes at different training centres. For this job she was getting some amount per student as grant. It is the prosecution case that some outstanding dues were to be recovered from the District Rural Development Agency, Dhule, wherein the appellant-accused was working as Assistant Project Officer, the authority for conducting and running the centres smoothly. It is the prosecution case that as the wife of the complainant was demanding the amount from the office of the appellant-accused and as she wanted to open one more centre, it is alleged that the appellant-accused demanded Rs. 1600/- from the husband of Kalawati. It is alleged that on 20-3-1983 the appellant-accused called the complainant at his house and demanded Rs. 1600 for getting permission to Kalawati for opening a new centre and also for issuing cheques towards the outstanding dues. It reveals from the record that the complainant had no money to pay. He, therefore, approached the office of the Anti-Corruption Bureau and lodged a complaint on 21st March 1983. A trap was arranged accordingly. The complainant was given marked currency notes in all Rs. 1600/- and the raiding party alongwith the complainant and a panch went to the office of the appellant-accused and from there, it is alleged, they went to a hotel for taking tea. After finishing tea, on the way to the office of the appellant-accused, it is alleged, the complainant offered the currency notes of Rs. 1600/- which were accepted by the appellant-accused. Immediately thereafter the raiding party came and caught the appellant-accused red-handed. Investigation commenced. Statements of the witnesses were recorded. After obtaining the necessary sanction, charge-sheet was filed against the appellant-accused before the Special Court, Dhule, for offences punishable under section 161 I. P. C. and under sections 5 (1) (d) and (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act.

(3.) AFTER framing the necessary charges and recording the evidence of the prosecution witnesses, the learned Special Judge held the appellant-accused for offences punishable under section 161 I. P. C. and under section 5 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and accordingly convicted him and sentenced to undergo R. I. for 1 year and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to undergo further R. I. for 3 months for offence punishable under section 161 I. P. C. and to undergo R. I. for 1 year and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to undergo further R. I. for 3 months. Both the substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently. Hence this appeal by the appellant-accused.