STATE OF ORISSA Vs. SACHIDANANDA SAHU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal under Sub -sections (1) and (3) of Section 378 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the State challenging the order dated 29.09.1984 passed by the learned Special Judge, Bhubaneswar in T.R. Case No. 16 of 1981 whereby the learned Special Judge acquitted the respondent of the charge under Section 5(1)(d), read with Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act.

(2.) THE prosecution case, in short, is that the complainant and his partners had taken lease of the cashew -nut plantation at Gopiballavpur for the year 1978 from the Soil Conservation Office, Cuttack. On 09.01.1978, they were transporting 28 bags of raw cashew -nuts in the truck bearing registration number OSS 1837 for sale to the Orissa Cashew Company, Bhubaneswar. On the way, the truck stopped at Gandarpur -Sikharpur check gate and the complainant went to the check gate office with the documents for verification. The accused -respondent, who was the Sales Tax Inspector in -charge of the check gate at that time, demanded Rs. 600/ - from the complainant by way of bribe. After negotiation, the amount was settled at Rs. 150/ -. However, the complainant expressed his inability to pay the amount then and there as he had no ready cash with him. At this, the accused -respondent suggested that the complainant should leave one bag of cashew -nut at the check gate and take back the same after paying the agreed amount of Rs. 150/ -. On 04.09.1978, one of the partners of the complainant approached the respondent with Rs. 100/ - and requested him to release the cashew -nut bag, but the respondent did not agree. After about a week, the complainant and Iris aforesaid partner again met the respondent at his residence, but the respondent asked them to come to the office after 10.00 P.M. Thereafter, the complainant lodged a complaint against the respondent before the Superintendent of Police (Vigilance), Cuttack. A trap was arranged on the same night and the respondent was caught red handed with the bribe money at the check gate office. The money, which consisted of three fifty rupee currency notes, was seized from the possession of the respondent. One bag of cashew -nut was also seized from the check gate office. A case was registered and investigation was taken up. On completion of investigation, charge -sheet under Section 5(1)(d), read with Section 5(2), of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 was submitted against the respondent.

(3.) IN order to prove the case, the prosecution examined as many as 18 witnesses, exhibited 25 documents and proved some material objects. The defence did not choose to examine any witness. The learned Special Judge, Bhubaneswar, who tried the case, after taking into consideration the evidence and other materials on record and after hearing the parties, by his judgment dated 29.09.1984, acquitted the respondent of the above charge. It is this order of acquittal against which the State has preferred the present appeal.