The judgment established the importance of proving demand and acceptance of illegal gratification by a public servant to establish guilt under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) R/w.13(2) of the PC Act. It also highlighted the consequences of giving false evidence and the court's power to initiate perjury proceedings.

JUDGMENT :

Challenge in this Criminal Appeal is to the judgment, dated 25.06.2007, in Calender Case No.24 of 2004, on the file of the Court of Special Judge for SPE and ACB Cases, Vijayawada (for short, “the learned Special Judge”), where under the learned Special Judge found the Accused Officer (AO) guilty of the charges under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) R/w.13(2) of the Prevention of the Corruption Act, 1988 (for short, “the PC Act”), 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 undergo Simple Imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- in default to suffer Simple Imprisonment for three months for the charge under Section 7 of the PC Act and also to undergo Simple Imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/- in default to suffer Simple Imprisonment for six months for the offence under Section 13(1)(d) R/w.13(2) of the PC Act. Both the substantive sentences shall run concurrently.

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

3. The case of the prosecution, in brief, as set out in the charge sheet filed by the State, represented by Range Inspector-III, Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB), Vijayawada Range, Vijayawada pertaining to Crime No.27/RCT-ACB-VJA/2003 of ACB, Vijayawada Range for the offences under Sections 7 and 13(2) R/w.13(1)(d) of the PC Act, is that the AO by name Sankula Chandra Sekhar worked as Sanitary and Food Inspector, Municipal Office, Machilipatnam, Krishna District from 01.06.1997 to 17.07.2003 as such he is a “Public Servant” within the meaning of Section 2(c) of the PC Act. The offence took place in the residential house of AO, which is situated at Door No.21-543-9-2A, Vijaya College Road, Paraspeta, Machilipatnam, Krishna District.

(i) LW.1 – Majeti Muralidhar, S/o. M.L.N. Nagabhushana Rao is a resident of Frenchpeta, Machilipatnam, Krishna District and lodged a report to the DSP, ACB, Vijayawada (LW.9) on 16.07.2003 at 04:00 p.m. alleging that AO demanded him to pay a bribe of Rs.5,000/- as illegal gratification other than legal remuneration for showing official favour of not booking any case against his Rice Shop by taking samples from his shop situated at D.No.23/288-5, Batchupeta, Machilipatnam, Krishna District.

(ii) After observing all the formalities, the DSP, ACB Vijayawada registered the report of LW.1 as a case in No.27/RCT-ACB-VJA/2003 of ACB, Vijayawada Range, dated 17.07.2003, at 05:15 p.m. and took up investigation.

(iii) On 17.07.2003 at about 09:00 p.m. the AO was trapped at his residence by the DSP, ACB, Vijayawada Range when he further demanded and accepted the bribe of Rs.5,000/- from LW.1. When both the hand fingers of AO were subjected to Sodium Carbonate Solution test, it yielded positive result. The tainted amount was recovered from the possession of AO, at his instance. The AO opened the left side drawer of the wooden table in front of him and showed a wad of currency notes which was kept in it. As per the instructions of LW.9 – DSP, ACB, Vijayawada Range, one of the mediators took the wad of currency notes and the serial numbers of the currency notes when compared were found tallied with the serial numbers of the currency notes produced by LW.1 during the pre-trap proceedings. When the inner linings of the table drawer were subjected to chemical test, it also yielded positive result. DSP, ACB seized the tainted amount and other materials under the cover of post-trap proceedings i.e., mediators report, dated 17.07.2003.

(iv) The AO was arrested and produced before the learned Special Judge for remand and later he was enlarged on bail. During investigation, LW.9 examined other witnesses and further got recorded the statement of LW.1 under Section 164 Cr.P.C. LW.10 – Range Inspector-III, ACB, Vijayawada Range, Vijayawada took up f