The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for corroboration of evidence in cases under the Prevention of Corruption Act, especially when the complainant is an interested witness. The judgment also underscores the importance of producing all relevant evidence and documents to establish the veracity of the case.

ORAL JUDGMENT :- Heard Shri Mardikar, Advocate for the appellants and Smt. Dangre, Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent State.

2. Criminal Appeal No. 322 of 2002 is filed by the original accused No.1 Bismillakha Salarkha Path an in Special Case No.3 of 1995. Appeal No. 499 of 2002 is filed by original accused No.2 in Special Case No.3 of 1995 - Kisan Nagorao Chipade. These appellants, for the sake of convenience are hereinafter referred to as accused Nos. 1 and 2 respectively and both these appeal convicting both the accused of offences punishable under sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read with section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and sentencing the accused to suffer R. I. for one year in respect of the offence punishable under section 13(1)(d) of the Act and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- in default to suffer R. I. for three months and further sentencing the accused to suffer R. I. for six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default to suffer R. I. for three months under section 7 of the Act and separately sentencing accused No. 2 to suffer R. I. for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/- in default to suffer R. I. for nine months in respect of the offence punishable under section 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, are being disposed of together by this common judgment and order.

3. The brief relevant facts of the prosecution case are as under:

(a) P. W. 4 - Kailash Onkar Tayde was a resident of Andura village and his house was situated next to his real brother P. W. 1 - Gajanan Onkar Tayde, P.W. 4 - Kailash was a person against whom several criminal cases under the Prohibition Act and N.D.P.S. Act were pending.

(b) On 12-1-1995, at about 3.30 P.M., P. W. 4 Kailash Onkar Tayde was returning from his field. On the way, accused No.1 - Bismillakha and four other persons who were Police Constables by name Punjab, Ingle, Vitthal and village Kotwal Sahdeo Dhaberao mat him and asked him what was inside the bundle of gross which P. W. 4 - Kailash was carrying on his head. They searched the bundle of gross and according to P. W. 4 Kailash, they did not find anything. It is a case of P. W. 4 - Kailash that accused No.1 - Bismillakha then foisted a false prohibition case against him and took his signature on some document. Accused No.1 told P. W. 4 - Kailash that as there were many cases pending against him, he would be initiating externment proceedings against P. W. 4 - Kailash and that if Kailash did not want that externment proceedings should commence against him, Kailash should pay an amount of Rs. 3,000/- to accused No. 1 P. W. 4 Kailash was frightened and, therefore, agreed to pay the amount. Accused No.1 Bismillakha then informed P. W. 4 - Kailash that there was a warrant against him and thus he took Kailash and detained him in the police lockup at Ural. On the next day, i.e. on 13-1-1995, accused No. 1 produced Kailash before the Magistrate and Kailash was then released on bail. On being so released, Kailash said to have narrated all the facts on 13-1-1995 to his brother P. W. 1 - Gajanan.

(c) It is a prosecution case that on 18-1-1995, there was a weekly market in Village - Andura. P. W. 4 Kailash had gone to the said weekly market. It is alleged that accused No.1 - Bismillakha came there, mat Kailash, took him aside and asked him as to when Kailash would pay him the amount of Rs. 3,000/-. Kailash informed accused No.1 that he would sell his she buffalo and would pay money to him. Kailash then came home and again informed about the entire incident occurring on 18-1-1995 to his brother P. W. 1 - Gajanan.

(d) On 23-1-1995, P. W. 1- Gajanan, the brother of Kailash, went to meet accused No. 1 at Nimba fata. He met accused No. 1 there. He told accused No.1 that his brother Kailash was frightened and that his brother was a poor person and was not able to pay the amount of Rs. 3,000/-. Thereafter accused No. 1 told Gajanan that he should pay Rs. 2,500/-. P. W. 1 - Gajanan then told accused No.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document