STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. ANEEL HILAL WAGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a State appeal whereby there is challenge to the judgment and order dtd. 15/2/2013 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge (Special Judge), Shahada in Special Case No. 8 of 2010 by which the respondent-accused was tried for offence under Ss. 7, 13(1)(d) r/w 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (PC Act).

(2.) In nutshell, prosecution was launched on complaint received from PW1 Ukhadu, to whom there was demand of bribe of Rs.1000.00 by accused, a Talathi, for carrying out Mutation Entry in the Revenue record in consequence to demise of his father. Exhibit 8, a complaint at the instance of PW1, led to ACB authorities summoning panchas, issuing necessary instructions, planning trap and executing it. After apprehension of accused on 19/1/2010, Investigating Officer gave complaint, investigated it and chargesheeted accused for above offence and he was duly tried, but was ultimately acquitted. Hence, appeal by the State.

(3.) Learned APP would point out that, prosecution has adduced evidence of five witnesses and by appraising this Court about the status of those witnesses, he submits that crucial evidence is that of PW1 complainant and PW2 shadow pancha as they were party to both, demand and acceptance. He pointed out that, on crucial aspect of demand and acceptance, both these witnesses are consistent and their testimony has remained unshaken in spite of extensive cross. Thus, according to him, essential ingredients for attracting the charges were very much available in the evidence.