The present appellant is convicted by the learned Special Judge (Anti Corruption), Aurangabad on 22.8.2000 in Special Case No. 2 of 1995.

The appellant is convicted for the offence punishable under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 200/-, in default he is directed to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three months.

The appellant is further convicted for the offence punishable under Section 13 (1)(d) r/w Section 13 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default he is directed to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months.

2. The prosecution case is as under :

On 18.1.1994, PW 1 Limbaji Sonawane lodged his complaint (Exh.24) with Anti Corruption Bureau, Aurangabad. Sum and substance of the said complaint is that, at village Chinchwan he and his brother Kisan are having one agricultural field at Gat No. 154. About three years ago, a well was dug, and therefore, to make entry of the said well in the 7/12 extract an application was made.

It is further stated that he along with his three brothers and mother reside jointly. Another agricultural field Gat No. 151 stands in the name of his brother Kisan. Through the said Gat No. 151 one Anusayabai Khomane, resident of Amthana demanded cart road. In that behalf, the complainant made an application with Tahsil office at Sillod.

When the case of the said cart road was going on, the Talathi of the village (present appellant) took an entry in the 7/12 extract of Gat No. 151 for having 15 feet card road. Therefore, on 31.12.1993 he gave an application with the Deputy Collector, Sillod.

The complaint further proceeds that on 12.1.1994 he along with his brother Kisan and one Vitthal met appellant and asked as to how there could be entry in the 7/12 extract about cart road when the dispute is going on in the Tahsil office and also when the application for taking entry of well is given why the entry of the said well is not taken. The complaint further recites, upon that the appellant asked complainant Limbaji that he should give an application on which he will take necessary entry in 7/12 extract regarding well and will mention 8 feet cart road instead of 15 feet, however, for that the complainant will have to give Rs. 600/-. The complaint further states that, he pleaded that he is poor. Therefore, ultimately the appellant was ready to accept Rs. 300/- from the complainant.

The complaint further proceeds that, on 14.1.1994 the complainant met the appellant at his residence and asked about his work. That time, appellant asked as to whether he has brought the money. Thereupon, the complainant told that arrangements for money is yet to be made. Then the appellant asked the complainant to come to his office on Wednesday with Rs. 300/-, then he will take necessary note in the 7/12 extract.

Upon receipt of the complaint (Exh.24), the Anti Corruption Bureau, Aurangabad called two panchas, namely Kashinath Kale (PW 2) and Shri Bawaskar. Both of them were directed to attend the Anti Corruption office on 19.1.1994. After consent from the panchas to act in the said capacity, they read the written complaint of the complainant. Thereafter demonstration of use of lamp and anthracene powder was shown to them. Anthracene powder was applied to the notes of Rs. 300/- i. e. three currency notes of Rs. 100/- each. The said notes were kept in the left side pocket of the shirt of the complainant.

PW 2 Kashinath was instructed to remain with the complainant at the time of trap and to listen the conversation between the appellant and the complainant. Necessary instructions were also given to Panch No. 2 and the members of the raiding party. Accordingly, a pre-trap panchanama (Exh.28) was prepared.

The prosecution case further proceeds that thereafter the complainant along with panch and staff of the Anti Corru