The prosecution must establish foundational facts to benefit from the presumption under Section 20 of the P.C. Act. Insufficient evidence and hostile witnesses can weaken the case against the accused.

JUDGMENT :

Challenge in this Criminal Appeal is made by the State, represented by Deputy Superintendent of Police, Anti-Corruption Bureau (“A.C.B.” for short), Vijayawada Range, Vijayawada, to the judgment, dated 12.03.2007 in C.C.No.4 of 2004, on the file of Special Judge for SPE & ACB Cases, Vijayawada (“Special Judge” for short), whereunder the learned Special Judge found the Accused Officer (“A.O.” for short) not guilty of the charges under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) r/w 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act (“P.C. Act” for short) and acquitted him under Section 248(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (“Cr.P.C.” for short), but made a finding that P.W.1 appears to have given false evidence and that it is expedient, in the interest of justice, that he be prosecuted for perjury. The learned Special Judge gave appropriate direction to lodge a complaint in Metropolitan Magistrate or Magistrate of First Class against P.W.1 for committing the offences under Sections 193 and 211 of the Indian Penal Code (“I.P.C.” for short) by exercising powers under Section 340 r/w 195(1)(b) of Cr.P.C.

2) The parties to this Criminal Appeal will hereinafter be referred to as described before the learned Special Judge for the sake of convenience.

3) The State, represented by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, A.C.B., Vijayawada Range, Vijayawada, laid a charge sheet pertaining to Crime No.30/ACB-RCT-VJA/2002 of A.C.B., Vijayawada Range, Vijayawada, alleging in substance as follows:

(a) The A.O. was working as Town Planning Supervisor, Municipal Corporation, Guntur, as on the date of the alleged offence i.e., on 28.08.2002 and as such he is a public servant within the meaning of Section 2(c) of P.C. Act, 1988.

(b) Sri Dumpala Srinivasa Rao, S/o Venkateswara Rao (P.W.1), a resident of Gunturivari Thota, 7th Line, Guntur, and a Licensed Building Surveyor, has been preparing building plans and estimations as required by the concerned building owners and that on 20.08.2002 one S.K. Jeelani (P.W.2) came to him and requested to prepare a plan for constructing a building. On that P.W.1 visited the site along with P.W.2 and asked him to pay the pending house taxes to the Municipal Corporation, Guntur. Thereupon P.W.2 paid the taxes and showed the receipts to P.W.1 and after that P.W.1 prepared a plan of the proposed building of P.W.2 and submitted the building application form along with necessary requisites on 22.08.2002.

(c) On 24.08.2002 the A.O. visited the site accompanied by P.W.1. Later on, as per the instructions of the A.O., P.W.1 met him at his office on 26.08.2002. Then the A.O. demanded a bribe of Rs.3,500/- for approval of the building plan of P.W.2 and further instructed him to pay the same to him on 28.08.2002 at his office.

(d) In spite of expressing his inability to pay the demanded bribe amount, the A.O. did not heed to his words and as there was no alternative for approval of the building plan, P.W.1 reluctantly agreed to pay the demanded bribe amount and as he was not willing to pay the bribe wholeheartedly, he met P.W.6 and presented Ex.P.1 report, who, after observing necessary formalities registered the case and investigated into.

(e) On 28.08.2002 the A.O. was successfully trapped by P.W.7 when he further demanded and accepted bribe amount of Rs.3,500/- from P.W.1 at about 4-30 p.m., in his office room for showing the official favour of approving house plan relating to P.W.2 as gratification other than legal remuneration and when both hand fingers and the inner linings of the upper shirt pocket of A.O. were subjected to S.C. solution test, the right hand fingers as well as the inner lining of the shirt pocket proved positive. The tainted amount was recovered from the physical possession of the A.O., which was seized along with relevant files and the resultant solutions and arrested the A.O., etc. P.W.7, the D.S.P. examined the witnesses and sent the draft final report to the D.G., ACB and after obtaining prosecution sanction order, he