JUDGMENT

PRAKASH D.NAIK, J. - The appellant was charged for the offences punishable under Ss. 7, 13(1)(d) r/w Sec. 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

2. The judgment was reserved after hearing both the sides. Thereafter the appeal was listed on 2/5/2022. Further submissions were heard and again closed for judgment.

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

i) The complainant Bhairavnath Ganpati Khandekar is resident Bolawi village, Tq. Kagal. His father Ganpati Khandekar holds 4 to 5 acres of land at village Bolawi. Complaint 's father and brothers are cultivating the said land; ii) Since there was no source of irrigation for the land, father of complainant applied to Panchayat Samiti, Kagal for sanctioning a well under Jawahar Water Scheme in the month of December-1999 and prayed for subsidy for constructing well. Necessary papers were attached to the application;

(iii) The Block Development Officer of Panchayat Samiti Kagal informed the father of complainant to execute the agreement for constructing well. Accordingly, complainant 's father went to the office of Panchayat Samiti, Kagal in the month of March-2000 and executed necessary agreement and agreed to incur the excess expenses for constructing well than the amount of subsidy of Rs.45,000.00. He also agreed to complete the engraving of well within time. On the application of complainant 's father the concerned Sectional Engineer prepared estimate and budget and shown the place as to where the well is to be engraved. Accordingly, work of constructing well had started in the month of April-2000 and it was completed upto 20 feet deep;

iv) The first installment of subsidy of Rs.8,968.00 was granted to the beneficiary in the month of July-2000 and the second installment of Rs.8,965.00 in the month of November-2001. The work of engraving the well was completed however, the construction was incomplete; v) The father of complainant was granted subsidy of Rs.45,000.00 out of which he received an amount of Rs.17,963.00. The complainant and his father approached Sectional Engineer Mr. B.V. Patil (accused). In the month of November-2001 and they inquired with him about the balance amount of subsidy. The accused told them that no amount of subsidy is available and on availability of such funds, he will do the work as early as possible. He told them to meet in the next week;

vi) The complainant and his father met the accused in the month of November-2001 i.e. in the last week and at that time the accused told them that he would arrange to issue the cheque of remaining subsidy as early as possible provided, they should pay him Rs.1,500.00. The complainant requested the accused to arrange the amount of subsidy in time. They have completed the work of well by borrowing loan from other persons. He was not in position to pay the amount and requested the accused that he would pay the amount after the receipt of cheque. The accused told them that once the cheque is received by them, nobody would turn and they should pay the amount first and then he will do the work. The complainant and his father showed inability to pay such amount and went away; vii) On 3/12/2001, the complainant went to the office of accused at Kagal and inquired with him about the subsidy. The accused inquired with the complainant whether he has brought the amount as stated on the previous occasion. The complainant told him that he was not in a position to pay the amount. The accused told him that unless and until the complainant pays an amount of Rs.1,500.00, he will not do the work of issuing cheque. The complainant requested the accused to reduce some amount on which the accused told him that he should initially pay an amount of Rs.1,000.00 and the balance amount after the receipt of the cheque. The complainant then told the accused that he has no money and he would arrange for the same within two days. Thereafter, the accused told him that he is out of station for two days and he was directed