The accused's act of deducting a sum from a colleague's travel allowance, despite obtaining the colleague's signature for the full amount, constituted an abuse of his position as a public servant, leading to the charge under Section 13(1)(d) R/w. Section 13(2) of the PC Act.

JUDGMENT :

The judgment in Calendar Case No.41 of 2001, dated 01.11.2007, on the file of the Court of III Additional District and Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge for SPE and ACB Cases, Visakhapatnam (for short, “the learned Special Judge”), is under challenge in the present Appeal filed by the unsuccessful accused.

2. The Accused Officer (AO) faced charges under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) R/w. Section 13(2) of the Prevention of the Corruption Act, 1988 (for short, “the PC Act”). The learned Special Judge, on conclusion of trial, found the AO not guilty of the charge under Section 7 of the PC Act but found him guilty of the charge under Section 13(1)(d) R/w. Section 13(2) of the PC Act and convicted him under Section 248(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, “the Cr.P.C”) and, after questioning him about the quantum of sentence, sentenced him to suffer Rigorous Imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- in default to suffer Simple Imprisonment for two months for the charge under Section 13(1)(d) R/w. Section 13(2) of the PC Act.

3. During pendency of the Appeal, the appellant died and Rapeti Bharathi Devi, wife of the original appellant, is brought on record as his legal representative to prosecute the Appeal vide order in I.A. No.2 of 2020, dated 06.02.2020.

4. The parties to this Criminal Appeal will hereinafter be referred to as described before the trial Court, for the sake of convenience.

5. The Case of the prosecution, in brief, as set out in the charge sheet filed by the Inspector of Police, ACB, Visakhapatnam alleging the offences under Sections 7 and 13(2) R/w. Section 13(1)(d) of the PC Act, is as follows:

(i) The Accused Officer by name Rapeti Veera Venkata Satyanarayana, worked as Veterinary Assistant at Veterinary Dispensary, Chinagadili, Visakhapatnam from 01.06.1998 till he was placed under suspension i.e., on 18.04.2001. Thus, the AO is a “Public Servant” within the meaning of Section 2(c) of the PC Act.

(ii) LW.1 – Dr. K. Bharat Ramesh, worked as Veterinary Assistant Surgeon of Veterinary Dispensary, Chinagadili, Visakhapatnam from 01.06.1998 to 25.08.2000. He was suspended from service on 25.08.2000. Prior to that, he submitted his TA bills for the months of February and March, 1999 to the office of LW.3 – Kolli Krishna Murthy Naidu, Assistant Director, Animal Husbandry, Visakhapatnam. Those bills were not returned from the office of Assistant Director, after sanction, till the date of his suspension. The de-facto complainant used to visit the Veterinary Dispensary, Chinagadili and used to enquire AO about his TA bills. Finally, on 07.03.2001, LW.1 visited the Veterinary Dispensary, Chinagadili and enquired AO about the TA bills. Accused informed to him that the TA bills were received from the office of Assistant Director and they are to be sent to the Treasury after getting the bills signed by LW.4 – Kolla Nagaraju, Veterinary Assistant Surgeon, Full Additional Charge, Chinagadili. He requested the accused to expedite the said process as he was in need of money. Then the AO for showing official favour in sending the TA bills after getting the signatures of the in charge Veterinary Assistant Surgeon, demanded him to give his consent for the deduction of Rs.400/- as bribe from out of the total amount of the TA bills for the months of February and March, 1999, at the time of disbursement, else he would delay the process. He requested the accused to reduce the bribe amount but the accused paid a deaf year. As there was no other go, he reluctantly gave his consent to the accused stating that Rs.400/- can be recovered from the AO from out of the total amount of the TA bills. Later, he lodged a report with LW.8 – D.V.S. Bhaskara Raju, Deputy Superintendent of Police, ACB, Visakhapatnam on 17.03.2001 at 09:00 a.m. The DSP, ACB on 18.03.2001 at 05:30 a.m. registered it as a case in Crime No.R/RC-WLR/2001 for the aforesaid offences and investigated into. On 18.03.2001 at 06:00 a.m. he secured the