V.VENKATESHAM Vs. STATE OF A.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellantaccused died during the pendency of the appeal and this Court by order dtd. 30/3/2022, permitted the Legal Representatives to prosecute the appeal.

(2.) The appellant who is no more (herein after referred to as accused) was convicted by the Additional Special Judge for SPE and ACB Cases, City Civil Court at Hyderabad, for the offence under Sec. 7 and Sec. 13(1)(d) rw. Sec. 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and sentenced to one year Rigorous Imprisonment under both counts.

(3.) Briefly, the case of the defacto complainantPW1 is that he is the proprietor of Ms.M.N.Arunodaya Industries, Mominpet. The Firm manufactures HDPE pipes. The villagers of Pilaram met PW1 and sought for quotations for supply of HDPE pipes. Quotation was sought to apply in the Mandal Praja Parishad Development office for sanction of amount to purchase pipes. Quotations were given to each of the villagers and also the quotation was addressed to Mandal Praja Parishad Development Officer (herein after referred to as 'MPDO'). The purchasers requested supply of pipes and the bills would be paid once sanction is accorded by the MPDO office. Three bills for Rs.10,000.00 each was given. The supply of HDPE pipes was made. The pipes were supplied under Ex.P1, P1(a), P2, P2(a), P3, P3(a) to three persons which are cash bills and delivery challans. Having received the HPDE pipes, Exs.P4 to P6 cash bills were issued.