JUDGMENT :

Sarang V. Kotwal, J.

1. Both these Appeals are decided by this common Judgment because they arise out of the same impugned Judgment and order dated 23.02.2016 passed by the learned Special Judge (Anti-Corruption), Pune, in Special Case No.53 of 2015.

2. The State of Maharashtra has preferred the Criminal Appeal No.325 of 2018 against the order of acquittal of the Respondent Sudesh Patil; who was the original Accused No.1. The Criminal Appeal No.157 of 2016 is preferred by Manoj Waghela, who was the original Accused No.2. He was convicted and sentenced by the learned Judge and, therefore, this is an Appeal against the conviction.

3. For the sake of convenience, in the following discussion, Sudesh Patil is referred to as the Accused No.1 and Manoj Waghela is referred to as the Accused No.2 as per their status before the Trial Court.

4. At the conclusion of the Trial, the Accused No.1 was acquitted from the charges of commission of the offences punishable under sections 7, 13(1)(d) r/w. 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as ‘P.C.Act’). The Accused No.2 was convicted for commission of the offence punishable U/s.7 of the P.C. Act and was sente