THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH REPRESENTED BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE-III ANTI-CORRUPTION BUREAU TIRUPATI RANGE, TIRUPATI Vs. R. KRISHNAIAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Criminal appeal is at the instance of the State against the judgment dated 21 -3 -2005 passed by the Special Judge for SPE & ACB Cases, Nellore, in CC. No. 3 of 1996 acquitting the respondent -accused for the offences under section 7 and 13 (1) (d) r/w section 13 (2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Heard Sri Gani -a -Musa, the learned Special Public Prosecutor appearing for ACB and Sri. M. Venkatanarayana, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent -accused.

(2.) ON the allegation that the respondent demanded an amount of Rs. 100/ - as illegal gratification from PW -1 for the purpose of doing official favour, namely, for issuing certified copies of two settlement deeds and accepted the bribe, charges were framed by the trial court against him under section 7, 13 (1) (d) read with section 13 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and he was tried for the said charges.

(3.) THE brief facts according to the prosecution are that one Smt. Chengamma, a close relative of PW -1 contrary to the agreement executed by her before the elders in respect of disposal of her property executed two settlement deeds in favour of one Mr. K. Babu in respect of certain property. PW -1, who wanted to obtain certified copies of the settlement deeds made an application before PW -4 the Sub -Registrar on 09 -2 -1994. The Sub -Registrar instructed the respondent to cause verification of the documents for the purpose of issuing the certified copies. According to the version of PW -1, the respondent for the purpose of issuing certified copies demanded from him an amount of Rs. 200/ - initially, subsequently however collected an amount of Rs. 50/ - for the purpose of purchasing requisite non -judicial stamp paper and demanded bribe of Rs. 100/ - for issuing the certified copies of the required document. It is said that PW -1 who was not willing to pay the bribe, approached the Deputy Superintendent of Police, ACB Tirupati and lodged a report with him on 14 -2 -1994. AT about 08:00 a.m., on the strength of the said report, the Deputy Superintendent of Police, ACB registered a case against the respondent under section 7, 11, 13 (2) read with section 13 (1) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 at 12 noon on the same day. Thereafter, he got laid a trap on the same day during the course of which it is alleged that the respondent in the office of the Sub -Registrar, Nagiri demanded from PW -1 an amount of Rs. 100/ - as bribe for issuing the certified copies, accepted the same and placed the amount on his table. Thereafter, it is said that PW -1 went outside and gave signal to the raiding party which on receiving rushed in and in the course of post -trap proceedings the chemical test conducted on the fingers of the respondent yielded positive result and thereafter an amount of Rs. 100/ - was recovered from the table of the respondent.