Back
2022 Supreme(Bom) 965
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD
VIBHA KANKANWADI, J.
Rafiq Beg Mirza & Anr. - Petitioners
Versus
The State of Maharashtra - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 276 of 2005
Decided On : 08-07-2022
For the Petitioner: Mr. Govind A. Kulkarni h/f Mr. D.R. Deshmukh.
For the Respondent: Mr. S.P. Deshmukh, APP.
The judgment emphasizes the high standard of proof required in corruption cases and the importance of consistent and credible evidence.
Headnote:
Corruption - Prevention of Corruption Act - Section 7, 13(1)(d), 13(2) - The court acquitted the accused of the offence under Section 7, 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the P.C. Act as well as Section 201 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code.
Fact of the Case:
The accused, a police head constable, was convicted for demanding and accepting illegal gratification. The prosecution alleged that the accused demanded and accepted money from the complainant in exchange for not taking legal action against him.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the prosecution failed to prove the demand and acceptance of the tainted money beyond reasonable doubt. It highlighted inconsistencies in the testimony of witnesses and the lack of verification of the demand by the investigating officer.
Issues: The issues revolved around the proof of demand and acceptance of illegal gratification, the conduct of the accused, and the adequacy of the investigation.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the technical nature of corruption cases and the meticulous proof required. It also stressed the importance of verifying the demand and the need for consistent and credible witness testimony.
Final Decision: The court acquitted the accused of all charges and set aside their convictions. Their bail bonds were cancelled, and any deposited fine amount was to be refunded to them.
JUDGMENT :
1. Present appeal has been filed by original accused No.1 challenging his conviction by learned Special Judge, Jalgaon, Dist. Jalgaon on 04.04.2005 in Special Case No.10 of 2004; thereby convicting him for the offence punishable under Section 7, 13(1)(d) read with 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as the “P.C. Act” for short).
2. Original accused No.1/present appellant No.1 was serving as Police Head Constable in the year 2004 and was attached to Pahur Police Station, Dist. Jalgaon at the time of incident. Original accused No.2/ present appellant No.2 was not a Government Servant.
3. Prosecution had come with a case that original complainant – one Dhanraj Pratap Jadhav was in cattle business in the weekly market at Wakod. He had sold pair of bullocks to one Rangnath on 02.07.2003. Some amount was remaining to be paid by Rangnath to complainant. In spite of repeated demands, he had not paid that amount for a period of two months. Complainant, therefore, went to accused No.1 and narrated the story. Accused No.1 had asked him to give a complaint-application, which was given accordingly. Accused No.1 had then called Rangnath to Police Station. Rangnath went along with his brother-in-law. They both had requested complainant that he should not lodge any report. They promised to pay the remaining amount within 10-15 days. It is the further story that, said brother-in-law had brought his pair of bullocks in the weekly market for sale and they were purchased by complainant through one Gopichand Chavan. Complainant paid part amount and promised to pay remaining within 8 days. After 8 days, he asked complainant to pay his balance. Complainant then told that his amount from Rangnath be arranged first and then he would pay. Said brother-in-law Arjun Kalal then lodged report against complainant in the police station. Complainant was then called by the accused No.1. Complainant then says that accused No.1 had demanded amount of Rs.5000/-. Accused No.1 had given threat to complainant that if he fails to bring the amount, he would be put behind bars. Accused No.1 had gone to Wakod bazar on 14.02.2004 and after giving threats, recovered Rs.1000/- from complainant. Complainant says that he promised accused No.1 to pay amount of Rs.4,000/- within 2-3 days. Complainant’s story is that he was proceeding to Pahur on 20.02.2004 and was near police station, when he was called by accused No.1. Accused No.1 demanded remaining amount of Rs.4,000/-. Complainant agreed to give Rs.2,000/- in weekly bazar. According to complainant, nothing was due to accused No.1 from him and the amount which the accused No.1 was demanding was illegal gratification. Complainant was not ready to give bribe, hence, he approached Anti-Corruption Bureau, Jalgaon and lodged complaint.
4. It is further prosecution story that after Dhanraj made complaint to Anti-Corruption Bureau, Jalgaon, two panchas were called and arrangement of raid was made. The prior formalities were completed. Complainant produced amount to be given as bribe in the form of twenty currency notes of Rs.100/- each. After giving of instructions to complainant and panchas, the police party, panchas and complainant went to spot i.e. which was near the Bus stand, Wakod, near the gate of cattle market in noon time. Complainant and the panch No.1 met accused No.1. There was conversation, but then accused No.1 went towards Pahur. He again came to the same place with another person. Thereafter accused No.1 asked accused No.2 to go near complainant and panch No.1 and then accused No.2 had demanded the amount, accordingly, it was given by complainant and was accepted by accused No.2. Complainant gave signal to the raiding party. Till the raiding party arrived accused No.1 went with accused No.2 on his mothor-cycle. Panchnama was executed. Police Inspector, Mahajan lodged First Information Report (FIR) against the accused persons. Accused No.2 came to be arrested on the same d
