STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. SHRIKRISHNA HARIBHAU CHAWALDHAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal preferred against the judgment and order dated 23-8-2005 rendered in Special Case No. 4/1999 by the Special Judge, Yavatmal thereby acquitting respondent of the offences punishable under Sections 7, 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The respondent was working as Steno Typist in the District Health Office, Zilla Parishad, Yavatmal in year 1997-98. The complainant Minesh Kakde had incurred considerable expenditure on account of medical treatment of his wife and, therefore, was interested in claiming reimbursement of this expenditure from his employer. He was a Teacher at Pathrad Gole, Tq. Ner, District Yavatmal. In order to prepare medical claim, some signatures and counter signatures of respondent were required. The bill was, therefore, submitted to the respondent for obtaining his counter signature. Respondent's duty was to place those bills before the District Health Officer and obtain his signatures. The respondent, however, did not perform his duty in spite of repeated visits and requests made to him by the complainant. Ultimately, the respondent revealed his real intention when he demanded from the complainant a bribe of Rs. 2,000/-. After negotiations, it was agreed between the complainant and respondent that the complainant would pay to the respondent an amount of Rs. 1,000/- as bribe for doing his official work. This settlement took place on 2491998.

(2.) The complainant, however, was not willing to pay bribe to the respondent and, therefore, he lodged a report with Anti Corruption Bureau, Amravati on 28-9-1998. Anti Corruption Bureau, Amravati decided to lay a trap for catching the respondent red handed while accepting bribe. Necessary arrangements were made and the trap was laid on 29-9-1998. The trap was successful. The respondent accepted the tainted currency notes forming together Rs. 1,000/- from the complainant and kept them in the left side pocket of his trouser. The members of the raiding party on getting signal arrived at the spot and apprehended the respondent. Tainted currency notes were recovered from his possession. Necessary panchanamas were drawn, statements of witnesses were recorded and after completion of investigation, chargesheet was filed against the respondent.

(3.) On merits of the case, learned Special judge found that the prosecution evidence was insufficient, even sanction was illegal and invalid and, therefore, acquitted the respondent of the offences punishable under Sections 7, 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act by his judgment and order dated 23-8-2005. It is the same judgment and order which are under challenge in the present appeal.