JUDGEMENT
M.T.JOSHI, J. -
(1.) Heard both sides.
(2.) Both the present Appeals have arisen out of the common judgment dated 18/10/2001 passed by Additional Sessions Judge cum Special Judge, Ambajogai in Special Case No. 01 of 1999, convicting the appellants/original accused in both the Appeals.
Appellant - Ganesh Bhagwan Gade was accused no.1 while appellant - Sayyed Khaja S/o Sayyed Halim was accused no. 2 in the aforesaid Special Case.
Appellant - Ganesh Bhagwan Gade was convicted for the offences punishable under section 7, 13(1)(d) r/w. 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 2 years and to pay fine of Rs. 3000/- and in default of payment of fine to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 3 months for the offence punishable under section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 2 years and to pay fine of Rs. 3000/- and in default of payment of fine to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 3 months for the offences punishable under section 13(1)(d) r/w. Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Both the substantive sentences were directed to run concurrently.
Appellant - Sayyed Khaja S/o Sayyed Halim was convicted for the offence punishable under section 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 1 year and to pay fine of Rs. 2000/- and in default of payment of fine to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 2 months.
For the sake of brevity, appellant - Ganesh Bhagwan Gade hereinafter would be referred as "appellant - Ganesh" while appellant - Sayyed Khaja S/o Sayyed Halim would be referred as "appellant - Sayyed".
(3.) The prosecution case in short is as under :-
That PW1 - complainant - Nilabai Gangaram Samudre resident of Ganjpur, Tq. Dharur, Dist. Beed was a helpless widow and, therefore, she used to get an amount of Rs. 100/- monthly, as the grant under 'Sanjay Gandhi Niradhar Yojana'. She received the said amount through postal money order for a period of 3-4 years through one Undari Post Office, however, no monthly payment is received and sometimes the amount for 4-6 months is received at one time. For that purpose, she was required to pursue appellant - Ganesh, who was the concerned Clerk in the Tehsil Office. Only after persuasion, he used to send the money order.
As during the period of the complaint, an amount of Rs. 500/- was not sent, the complainant visited the appellant - Ganesh in his office on 31/7/1998. At that time, she had taken one Angad Dapkar as a companion. At that time, appellant - Ganesh stated that though the complainant was receiving the amount without any efforts, she did not use to take his care.
Ultimately, during talk, appellant - Ganesh in presence of said Angad told that certain expenses towards tea etc. will have to be made. Upon that, the complainant offered Rs. 25/-. Appellant - Ganesh however stated that unless Rs. 300/- are paid, the work would not be done. After negotiation, appellant - Ganesh agreed to accept an amount of Rs. 150/- and told that the said amount be paid on 03/08/1998 in his office on or before 03.00 pm. Since the complainant did not wish to pay any bribe, on 03/08/1998 itself, she filed complaint with Anti Corruption Bureau, Beed. ;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.