JUDGMENT - M.F. SALDANHA, J.:--The appellant in this case, who at the relevant time was working as Talathi, Saja Urali Devachi, is alleged to have demanded Rs. 100/- as a bribe from the complainant, Bhairu Shripati Holkar, and received the same on 29-8-1986. The prosecution alleges that Bhairu had complained to the Anti-Corruption Bureau Authorities, who arranged for a trap. According to the prosecution the complainant, Bhairu, along with the Panchas met the accused in the office on 29-8-1986. The reason for the demand as set out by the complainant is that he had purchased two lands in a connection with which there was an enquiry under the Bombay Tenancy Agricultural Lands Act. Furthermore, he contends that he had remained absent on two occasions and that the Talathi had served a notice on him and warned him that if did not remain present in the enquiry that his lands will be forfeited to the Government. He states that having been so pressurised, the accused told him that if he (Bhairu) paid Rs. 100/- that everything would go well for him. According to him, therefore, the demand constituted a bribe and he went to the A.C.B. Authorities in order to ensure that action was ta

Click Here to Read the rest of this document