M. T. Joshi, J. - (1.) Heard both sides.
(2.) Aggrieved by the conviction for the offences punishable under section 7 and 13 (1) (d) read with section 13 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, by the learned Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge, Ambajogai, vide judgement and order dated 6th November, 2011 passed in Sessions Case No. 3 of 2000, the present appeal is preferred by the original accused. He was sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay fine of Rs. 3000/ on each count. Both the sentences were directed to run concurrently.
(3.) The prosecution case, in short, is as under : That, PW3 Purushottam Deshmukh the complainant wanted that there should be mutation entry in his name in the Gram Panchayat record of village Massajog, Taluka Kaij, District Beed. The present appellant was working as Gramsevak of the said Gram Panchayat. Therefore, on 20th October, 1999, the complainant handed over the original sale deed which was recorded on a stamp paper of Rs.5/- to the appellant. The appellant, however, made a demand of Rs.1,000/ for making necessary entries and for grant of certified copy of the same. Even after negotiations, the appellant did not agree to reduce the amount. Ultimately, the complainant paid an amount of Rs.150/ to the appellant on that day. The appellant warned the complainant to pay balance of Rs.850/ by the evening of that day. The complainant, however, avoided by saying that he would be out of station for three to four days and thereafter, the balance amount would be paid. On 25th October, 1999, the complainant again met the appellant in connection with the said work. The appellant again made the demand of the money. Thereupon, the complainant promised to the appellant that the amount would be paid on the next day i.e. 26th October, 1999 by 12:00 noon at the office of the appellant at Massajog. Accordingly, the complaint came to be filed with Anti Corruption Bureau, Beed on 25th October, 1999. The then Deputy Superintendent of Police, ACB, Beed PW4 Mahindra Bhokare, conducted the investigation in the case. He collected two employees from the R.T.O. Office as panch witnesses. Out of them, PW1 Raghuttam Naikwade was agreed to be the shadow panch witness, who was directed to hear the conversation and watch transaction between the appellant and the complainant. The decoy money brought by the complainant was smeared with anthracene powder. The appellant was found in the office of the one another Gramsevak Mr. Kedar in Kaij town. The shadow panch witness and the complainant went to meet the appellant while rest of the members of the raiding party were waiting outside the office of the appellant. Thereat, during the conversation, the complainant asked the appellant as to whether the certified copy was prepared. Upon that, the appellant asked as to whether the remaining amount of Rs.850/ was brought. The complainant replied that he had brought the money. Thereupon, the appellant made certain entries in the old registers. He also prepared certified copy of the same and handed over the it to the complainant. Thereafter, the appellant asked for money, whereupon, the complainant handed over the decoy money to him. Thereupon, the complainant gave predetermined signal upon which the raiding party arrived at the spot. The investigating officer thereafter carried further activities of examining the hands and clothes of the appellant and thereafter of the complainant under the ultra violate lamp which confirmed the above activities. Thereafter, further investigation was made and necessary documents were seized. The Chief Executive Officer of Zilla Parishad, Beed was requested to grant sanction to prosecute the appellant. PW2 Mr. S. Chokkalingam, the then Chief Executive Officer, upon perusal of the documents granted anction to prosecute the appellant by issuing sanction order at Exhibit30. Thereafter, the chargesheet came to be filed in the Court.;