STATE ACB WARANGAL RANGE Vs. B.RAMACHANDRAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenging the validity and the legality of the judgment rendered by the Court of the Principal Special Judge for SPE and ACB Cases, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, in C.C.No.10 of 2001, dated 08.09.2006, the appellant is before this Court by way of appeal.

(2.) In the grounds of appeal, it is urged that the judgment of the trial Court is contrary to law and weight of evidence; that the learned judge of the trial Court failed to appreciate the oral, documentary and circumstantial evidence produced by the appellant in proper perspective and thereby, came to an erroneous conclusion; that the learned judge ought to have observed that the trap was successfully laid and the amount was recovered from the respondent-accused which is sufficient to hold the respondent-accused guilty; that the learned judge erroneously gave findings against the prosecution with regard to the burden of proof; that the learned judge ought to have seen that the evidence of P.W-2 is relevant and though there are some minor discrepancies in the evidence of P.W-1, the learned judge ought to have ignored those minor discrepancies and ought to have recorded conviction; that the leaned judge failed to observe that there is clear evidence on record with regard to the commission of offence by the respondent-accused; that the learned judge ought to have observed that there is no evidence on record to show that P.W-1 was inimically disposed against the respondent-accused to implicate him in a flase trap case; that the learned judge ought not to have concluded that there is no official favour to be done as on the date of the trap and thus, recording of acquittal is nothing but illegal and unsustainable in the eye of law and therefore, the same is liable to be set aside.

(3.) Heard the submission of the learned Special Public Prosecutor for the appellant and the submission of the learned counsel for the respondent-accused.