SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

SHRIKANT D.KULKARNI
Sayaji Dashrath Kawade – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Appellant:Mr. R.N. Dhorde, Senior Counsel i/b Mr. V.R. Dhorde, Advocate
For the Respondent: Mr. S.P. Deshmukh, APP

JUDGMENT

Feeling aggrieved by the impugned judgment and order of conviction passed in Special Case No. 4 of 2000 by the Special Judge (P.C. Act), Aurangabad, the appellant/original accused has preferred this appeal.

2. The facts giving rise to this appeal in brief are as under:

3. The appellant was serving as Sub Divisional Engineer in the Department of Telecommunications at Aurangabad at the relevant point of time. The complainant (PW-1) Devidas Mohite had applied for installation of STD/PCO booth at Aurangabad. One Mr. Anil Agrawal was STD machines dealer and he contacted to the complainant that he should purchase machine from him. Accordingly, the complainant received demand note of Rs.5,000/-, and the complainant deposited the same in the telephone office. The site inspection was conducted when the appellant refused to give connection in the said premises on account of change of site. Mr. Anil Agrawal informed to the complainant that if he wanted to install the STD booth in the same premises, he had to pay Rs.2,000/-. Accordingly, the complainant agreed to pay the said amount. But he was not ready to pay bribe. The complainant went to ACB office at Aurangabad and lodged comp

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top