M.MADHAVA RAO Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant was convicted for the offence under Sec. 7 and 13(1)(d) r/w 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months and one year respectively vide judgment in C.C.No.22 of 2004 dtd. 23/10/2008 passed by the Principal Special Judge for SPE and ACB Cases, City Civil Court, Hyderabad.

(2.) Briefly, the case of P.W.1, who is the defacto complainant is that he submitted Ex.P1 application for issuance of authorization/licence to run a fair price shop. In October, 2002, interviews were conducted and it was informed by the RDO that agreement, challan etc., have to be submitted for the licence. Accordingly, original challan and other documents were submitted on 13/2/2003 by PW1. On 14/2/2003, P.W.1 met the appellant who was working as Senior Assistant and enquired about dealership licence, for which appellant demanded Rs.5,000.00 for processing the application and issuing the licence. Again on 18/2/2003, P.W.1 met the appellant and requested to issue dealership. However, the appellant insisted for paying bribe amount, but reduced the bribe to Rs.4,500.00.

(3.) P.W.1 approached the ACB authorities and lodged complaint on 19/2/2003. P.W.6/DSP asked the complainant to come on the next day on which date trap would be arranged. On 20/2/2003, P.W.1 went to the ACB office where DSP, mediators and other members of the trap party were present. The formalities before proceeding to lay a trap were completed. The pre-trap proceedings Ex.P12 was drafted in the office of ACB- DSP.