STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. NAGINBHAI DHHANJIBHAI PATEL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present acquittal Appeal has been filed by the appellant original complainant, State of Gujarat under Section 378(1)(3) of the Cr. P.C., against the Judgment and order dated 19.01.2005 rendered by the learned Special Judge, Bharuch, Fast Track Court No.5, Bharuch, in Special Corruption Case No.3 of 2002. The said case was registered against the present respondentoriginal accused for the offence under Sections 7, 13(1)(d) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act.

(2.) ACCORDING to the prosecution case, complainantBhaveshkumar Kanubhai Purohit, resident of 19/2, Narayankunj Kunjvihar, Street No.5, Near Tulsidham, Jhadeshwar Road, Bharuch was pursuing his study as Boiler Attendant Apprentice in ITI. He completed 3rd year and examination was to be held on 20.11.2001. As a part of his study, he had to undergone a practical training and he was posted at Sitaram Paper Mill Limited. As sufficient attendance was the requirement of the study and to appear in further examination, he had to fill up form showing his attendance and submit it to ITI. For the said procedure, signature of the respondentaccused was required to be obtained and for that purpose, the complainant made request to respondentaccused to put his signature on the prescribed form. Therefore, the respondentaccused examined the papers and declined to make his signature as his attendance was less. So, the complainant requested the respondentaccused that if he did not make his signature, his academic year would be spoiled. Upon such request, the respondentaccused told that as the attendance was less and if the complainant wanted to obtain his signature, the complainant should have to pay Rs.2000/to him and thereafter, his form would be accepted. At the relevant time, as the complainant did not have money, the respondentaccused told the complainant to bring money. As the complainant did not want to pay the amount in form of illegal gratification, he approached ACB Police Station, Bharuch and lodged complaint against the respondentaccused bearing C.R.No.11 of 2003. The complaint was noted down by Mr.Koralwala, PI, Bharuch and called two panchas. Both the panchas were introduced with the complainant and facts of the complaint were disclosed to both the panchas. In presence of members of raiding party, search of the complainant and panchas were made. Then, Mr.Koralwala, called lamp operator and told him to show and explain use of the anthracene powder and ultra violate lamp. Preliminary panchnama was drawn. Then, the trap amount of Rs.2,000/was produced and under the instructions of the Trapping Officer, anthracene powder was applied on the trap amount and the said trap amount put into the pocket of the complainant and directed him not to touch the said amount prior to demand made by the respondentaccused. Panch No.1 was advised to stay with the complainant and listen all talk took place between the complainant and the respondentaccused while panch No.2 was advised to stay with the members of raiding party. The complainant was also instructed to give signal after the demand made by the respondentaccused. Then, they went to the place of trap and complainant went to the office of the respondentaccused with panch No.1. At that time, the respondentaccused told the complainant to pay the fees and verify the form. Then, the respondentaccused told the complainant to meet him at the railway station. Then, panch No.1 and complainant came back to the Trapping Officer and narrated the incident. Thereafter, they arranged to go to railway station. After an hour, the respondentaccused came and he called the complainant by name and the trap amount of Rs.2,000/was given to the respondentaccused by the complainant. Then, signal was given and members of raiding party rushed to the place of trap. Trapping Officer introduced all the members of raiding party and panch and search was made in presence of panchas and Rs.2,000/was recovered from the respondentaccused and same was tallied with the panchnama. Then, the trap amount and clothes of the respondentaccused were recovered and receipt and seizure memo were issued to respondentaccused. Then, investigation was carried out and statements of the witnesses were recorded. To prosecute against the respondentaccused, sanction was obtained from the competent authority. Then, chargesheet was filed against the respondentaccused for offence under Sections 7, 13(1)(d) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, which was numbered as Special Corruption Case No.3 of 2002.

(3.) ON the basis of above allegations, charge was framed vide Exh.7 and readover and explained to the accused for the offence punishable under Sections 7, 13(1)(d) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. The accused pleaded not guilty to the charge and claimed to be tried.