JUDGMENT :

1. By this appeal, the appellant (the accused) has challenged judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 25.4.2005 passed by learned Special Judge, Akola in Special Case No.4/1998 whereby the accused is convicted for offences punishable under Sections 7 and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (the said Act).

For offence under Section 7 of the said Act, the accused is sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay fine Rs.500/-, in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for two months.

For offence under Section 13(2) of the said Act, the accused is sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay fine Rs.500, in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for two months.

2. Brief facts of the prosecution case emerges as under:

Keshavrao Ghatage, is complainant and an agriculturist by profession. The accused, at the material time, was serving as Sub Register, Barshitakli, district Akola. On 15.10.1997, the complainant visited office of the Sub Register for execution of Sale Deed of land which he was intending to purchase from one Sitaram Mahadeorao Ghonge. He enquired with one stamp vendor viz. Ismail as to expenses of the sale deed and he was informed that he has to incur expenses of Rs.850/- towards stamp, scribing documents, and photocopies. A draft of the sale deed was prepared and he, along with the vendor and witnesses, approached to the Sub Registrar i.e. the accused. The accused informed him that for executing sale deed for 34R land, permission of the Sub Divisional Officer is required. The complainant told him that in the previous year, in similar type of transaction, no permission was obtained and requested the accused to register the sale deed. As per allegations, the accused demanded Rs.700/- from him for execution of the sale deed as a gratification amount. The complainant shown his readiness. However, he was not having money. As the complainant was not willing to pay the amount, he approached the office of the Anti Corruption Bureau on 16.10.1997 and lodged a report.

3. After receipt of the report, officers of the Anti Corruption Bureau called two panchas. In presence of the panchas, the complainant narrated the incident which was verified by the panchas from the First Information Report. After following due procedure, it was decided to conduct a raid and the panchas and complainant were called on the next date i.e. 17.10.1997. On 17.10.1997, the complainant produced tainted currency notes of Rs.700/- i.e. seven currency notes of Rs.100/- denomination. A demonstration, as to use and characteristics of phenolphthalein powder and sodium carbonate, was shown. The said solution was applied on the tainted amount and kept in the shirt pocket of the complainant. Some instructions were given to pancha No.1 Kisan Bodiram Rathod to stay with the complainant and pancha No.2 was asked to stay along with the raiding party members. The complainant was further instructed to hand over the amount only on demand. Accordingly, a pre-trap panchanama was drawn.

4. After pre-trap panchanama, the complainant along with the panchas and raiding party members went at the office of the accused and the accused demanded the amount and the complainant handed over the same to him. The accused was caught after the complainant gave signal to the raiding party members. On enquiry, pancha No.1 disclosed as to demand and acceptance. The hands of the accused were examined and the tainted amount was recovered from the shirt pocket of the accused. Accordingly, post-trap panchanama was drawn. The officers of the Anti Corruption Bureau lodged report about the said incident, seized relevant documents, and sanction was obtained to prosecute the accused. After completion of investigation, chargesheet was filed against the accused.

5. During trial, the prosecution examined in all four witnesses i.e. Keshavrao Chitrangad Ghatage (PW1) vide Exhibit-23, the complainant; Kisan Bodiram Rathod (PW2) vide Exh