GOVIND ANANAD KARVANDE Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellants herein are convicted for offence punishable under section 7, 13 (1)(d) r/w 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and offence punishable under section 120 of Indian Penal Code. Appellants are sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment of 2 years and fine of Rs. 1000.00 each in default to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for 3 months for offence punishable under section 7 of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Appellants are sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 2 years and to pay fine of Rs. 1000.00 each for offence punishable under section 13 (1) (d) r/w 13 (2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Appellants are sentenced to pay fine of Rs. 1000.00 each in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 3 months for offence punishable under section 120 of Indian Penal Code in Special Case No. 21 of 1993 by Special Judge, Pune vide Judgment and Order dated 18/06/1998. Hence, this appeal.

(2.) Such of the facts necessary for the decision of this appeal are as follows.

(3.) It is the case of prosecution that P.W. 1 Manik Walekar approached office of Anti Corruption Bureau, Pune on 27/10/1989 and have formally lodged a report alleging therein that he is the owner of hotel Shivshakti. He had applied for the telephone connection in the year 1984 and the application was filed to telephonic office at Pune. He had made enquiry with the lineman (Accused no. 1) on several occasions, however, the work was not being proceeded with. He had also been to the office at Otur and had ventilated his grievance that the other persons who had applied for the connection had already received the telephonic connection. According to P.W. 1 he was informed by the original accused no. 1 that in the event he wanted the connection, he would have to incur certain expenses. On 25/10/1989, original accused no. 1 had informed the complainant that in order to give sanction of the telephonic connection he would have to incur certain expenses. P.W. 1 had accompanied accused no. 1 to Junnar on his motorcycle. There they had met accused no. 2. It is also alleged that original accused no. 2 had also informed the complainant i.e. P.W. 1 to incur certain expenses and amount of Rs. 1500.00 was demanded. Complainant had expressed his inability to pay the said amount as it was exorbitant and therefore there was negotiation and the amount was settled at Rs. 1000.00. He was further informed that phone connection will be installed on 30/10/1989 and the amount will have to be paid on the same day. Complainant had expressed his inability to meet the accused persons on 30/10/1989 as it was Diwali Padva and therefore it was decided that the amount would be paid on 31/10/1989. On 27/10/1989, complainant had approached office of A.C.B. at Pune and lodged report. The Dy. S.P. A.C.B. had taken cognizance of his report. Officer had called two public servants to act as panchas to the trap which was to be laid on 31/10/1989. Complainant P.W. 1 had halted at Pune in the night of 30/10/1989. On that day, in fact the phone connection was installed. On 31/10/1989, he went to the office of A.C.B., Pune. Pre-trap panchanama was recorded. He was instructed to part with the tainted notes only upon a demand being made by the accused persons. P.W. 3 Bahiram Gadikar was directed to act as shadow witness. The raiding party had been to the hotel of the complainant. After accused no. 1 had accepted the tainted currency notes, complainant had given the pre-determined signal. The raiding party had caught hold of accused no. 1 along with the tainted currency notes which were found in his pocket. Thereafter P.W. 6 Dy. S.P. Kamble lodged a report at the police station against accused for offence punishable under section 7 and 13 of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. After obtaining sanction for prosecution, charge-sheet was filed and the case was registered as Special Case No. 21 of 1993. Prosecution examined 7 witnesses to bring home the guilt of the accused.