K.RAGHUNATHA RAO Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant is aggrieved by the conviction recorded under Ss. 7 and Ss. 13(1)(d) r/w Sec. 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (for short 'the Act of 1988') and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months and one year, respectively, vide judgment in C.C.No.29 of 2003, dtd. 6/11/2008 passed by the Principal Special Judge for SPE and ACB Cases, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, present appeal is filed.

(2.) The case of the ACB is that the appellant worked as Junior Accounts Officer in the office of APCPDCL, Mint Compound. The acquitted Accused No.2 worked as LDC in the same office. The complainant/P.W.1 was working as Accounts-cum- Administrative Assistant in M/s.Embedded Infotech (Private) Limited. PW1 approached the appellant requesting to change the name of electricity service connection in the name of the company as the company shifted their premises to new address. An application was made to change the old service connection in the name of the company M/s.Embedded Infotech Private Limited as instructed by P.W.2, who is the Manager (Operation) in the said company. Appellant refused to process the file and demanded an amount of Rs.1,500.00 for processing the file. The acquitted accused also allegedly demanded Rs.1,500.00 for processing. Aggrieved by the said demand, on 16/4/2002 P.W.1 as instructed by P.W.2 filed a complaint stating that the appellant and another have demanded Rs.1,500.00 to be paid on the very same day i.e., 16/4/2002. Accordingly, the said complaint was registered at 12.30 p.m on 16/4/2002 and P.W.1 was asked to come at 2.00 p.m on the same day. The pre-trap proceedings under Ex.P6 were drafted from 2.30 p.m in the office of ACB and concluded at 4.00 p.m.

(3.) At 4.00 p.m, the trap party which included DSP, P.W.1, Inspector, independent mediators and others proceeded to the office of the appellant. The complainant P.W.1 entered into the office along with P.W.3 one of the independent mediators and after receipt of the said tainted bribe amount by the appellant, P.W.1 came out and gave the pre-arranged signal to indicate that the amount of bribe has been received by the appellant. The DSP and others entered into the office after receipt of the signal and conducted tests on the hands of the appellant, which proved positive. The said amount was produced by the appellant from his left side pant pocket. Thereafter, after concluding the post trap proceedings, the investigation was handed over to P.W.9, who concluded the investigation and filed charge sheet for the offences under Ss. 7 and 13(1)(d) r/w Sec. 13(2) of the Act against the appellant and another. After concluding the examination of the witnesses, the learned Special Judge found that this appellant is guilty and acquitted accused A2 not guilty for the said offences.