RAVI DUBEY Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ARGUMENTS heard.

(2.) BY order dated 12-7-2001 the Special Judge (Lokayukta), Jabalpur framed a charge against this petitioner for offences punishable under Section 13 (1) (d) and Section 13 (2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 giving rise to this revision.

(3.) SHRI Prashant Singh has drawn my special attention to Paragraph 9 of the order passed by Special Judge (Lokayukta), Jabalpur wherein it is opined by the learned Special Judge that even if something is accepted without any demand been made for doing some official work, the transaction would fall in the category of bribe. According to Shri Singh there is no iota of evidence on the fact that the petitioner ever made a demand of Rs. 700/- and the amount which is alleged to have been recovered from the possession of the petitioner at the time of trap is well explained. It is also submitted by Shri Singh that the petitioner has satisfactorily explained his being in possession of the aforesaid amount, by filing documents marked as Document Nos. 7 to 10, alongwith this petition.