LAWS(APH)-2012-7-15

SYED ABDUL MOIZ Vs. STATE OF A P

Decided On July 24, 2012
SYED ABDUL MOIZ Appellant
V/S
STATE OF ANDHARA PRADESH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is filed against the judgment dated 16.07.2005 passed by the Principal Special Judge for SPE & ACB Cases-cum-IV Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad (for short 'the trial Court') in C.C.No.19 of 1996. The appellant was convicted by the trial Court for the charges under Section 7 and Section 13(1)(d) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (for short 'the Act'). For the conviction under Section 7 of the Act, the appellant was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-. He was further sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years for the offence under Section 13(1)(d) punishable under Section 13(2) of the Act and also to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/-. Challenging the said order of conviction and sentence, the appellant preferred the present appeal.

(2.) THE brief facts giving rise to filing of the present appeal may be stated as follows: The appellant was working as Assistant Environmental Engineer (AEE), Regional Office, A.P. Pollution Control Board, Nizamabad (for short 'APPCB'). He issued show cause notice dated 11.08.1995 to the company known as M/s.Al- Hafsa Bone Mill and Fertilizer Company situated at Rudroor village, Nizamabad District, for which P.W.1 is the Managing Partner, stating that the fertiliser company was causing smell nuisance in and around the company. In response thereto, the company sent reply dated 18.08.1995 duly marking copies to the Member Secretary of APPCB stating therein that the company was not causing any smell nuisance, as it is situated far away from the residential locality. According to the prosecution, the appellant without considering the explanation offered, demanded P.W.2 a bribe of Rs.10,000/- for dropping the matter, for which P.W.2 expressed his inability. Thereafter the appellant again issued a final show cause notice dated 23.09.1995 to P.W.2. After receiving the said notice, P.W.2 met the appellant personally at his house situate at Malapalli, Nizamabad and tendered a reply to the said notice also. But the appellant refused to act on the said reply notice and reiterated his demand for bribe. Pressing for the said demand, it is said that the appellant told P.W.2 that at- least he had to arrange an amount of Rs.5,000/- by 14.10.1995, as he propose to visit the company office at Old Bus stand, Bodan on 15.10.1995 at 12.00 noon. It is said that the appellant also threatened that unless the demand was met, he would see the closure of the company by initiating action.

(3.) P.W.3-Sai Baba, the mediator however supported the prosecution version. Apart from testifying about the entire trap proceedings as per prosecution version, his version before the trial Court reveals that the appellant enquired P.W.2 whether he brought the amount for which P.W.2 answered affirmatively, took out the currency notes and gave them to the appellant, the appellant in turn received the amount and kept it in the right side pant pocket. Immediately, he came out and gave the pre-arranged signal.