GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA, J.

( 1 ) THE appellant/sole accused, who was a Senior Assistant in mandal Revenue Office, Atreyapuram, East godavari District, was tried by the learned iii Additional District Judge-cum-Special judge for S. P. E A. C. B. Cases, Visakhapatnam, in C. C. No. 24 of 1995 for the offences punishable under Sections 7, 11 and 13 (2) read with 13 (1) (d) of the Prevention of corruption Act, 1988 and Section 201 IPC and was ultimately found guilty of the said offences and accordingly sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- in default to suffer simple imprisonment for three months for the offence punishable under Section 7 of the PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION ACT, 1988; rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- in default to suffer simple imprisonment for three months for the offence punishable under Section 13 (2) read with Section 13 (1) (d) of the Prevention of corruption Act; and rigorous imprisonment for six months for the offence punishable under Section 201 IPC.

( 2 ) THE substance of the charges framed against the appellant is that on 22-3-1990 at about 3. 40 p. m. at Mandal Revenue Office, atreyapuram. East Godavari District, the appellant being a public servant accepted an amount of Rs. 200/- to do a favour to the complainant and with an intention to screen away the legal punishment fabricated an inland letter with forged postal stamps to create an impression that the said amount was received as repayment of a debt and thus committed the offences punishable under Sections 7, 13 (2) read with 13 (1) (d) of the PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION ACT, 1988 and section 201 IPC.

( 3 ) THE case of the prosecution as unfolded during the course of trial is that the appellant was working as a Senior assistant-cum-Head Assistant in the mandal Revenue Office. In order to obtain a loan from Life Insurance Corporation of India for the purpose of renovating the old house, one Challa Venkata Ramanaiah (father of PW1) applied for an Agricultural income Certificate from the office of the mandal Revenue Officer and gave the application to PW1 asking him to pursue the said application and collect the certificate. Pursuant to that, PW1 approached the Village Assistant of Peravaram Village and got the required endorsement on the application and as directed by the Village assistant, his brother (PW2) submitted the said application in the office of the Mandal revenue Officer. On submission of the application, the Revenue Inspector visited their village on 5-3-1990, inquired the father of PW1 and recorded his statement. Later, PW1 went to the office of the Mandal revenue Officer on 6-3-1990 and collected the copies of the statements recorded by the Revenue Inspector and also the adangal extracts. As per the directions of the Revenue Inspector, PW1 went to the appellant/accused who was at the relevant point of time working as Head Assistant in the said office of the Mandal Revenue officer and handed over those papers to him on that day i. e. , 6-3-1990. On a perusal of the papers furnished by PW1, the appellant informed him that he would not get the required loan on the basis of the said documents and asked him to meet the mandal Revenue Officer and represent the same. Though PW1 went to the M. R. O s office on several occasions thereafter, he could not get the certificate. Finally on 20-3-1990, when he met the appellant in the office, he informed PW1 that if he pays an amount of Rs. 200/- he would get the certificate. Thereupon, PW1 left the office informing the appellant that he would come with money on 23-3-1990 and collect the certificate.

( 4 ) IN view of the said demand made by the appellant, PW1 went to the office of the Deputy Superintendent of Police, A. C. B. at Rajahmundry (examined as PW6) on the next day i. e. on 21-3-1990 and gave a report (Ex. P-4 ). On the basis of the said report, the Dy. Superintendent of Police instructed PW1 to come on the next day wit

Click Here to Read the rest of this document