IMPORTANT POINT
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement to prove demand and acceptance of illegal gratification by a public servant under the Prevention of Corruption Act, emphasizing the need for direct or circumstantial evidence to establish guilt.

JUDGMENT :

1. This appeal has been filed by the appellant – State under Section 378(1)(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the judgment and order of acquittal dated 30.12.2004 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Tack Judge, Fast Track Court No. 1, Gandhinagar (herein after referred to as ‘the learned Trial Court’) in Special (ACB) Case No. 3 of 2001, whereby, the learned Trial Court has acquitted the respondent from the offences punishable under Sections 7, 12 and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. The respondents are hereinafter referred to as ‘the accused’ as they stood in the original case, for the sake of convenience, clarity and brevity.

1.1. During the pendency of the appeal the respondent No. 2 has expired on 19.05.2010 and hence the appeal qua the respondent No. 2 was abated by an order dated 23.02.2024.

2. The brief facts that emerge from the record of the case are as under:

2.1. That the accused No. 1 Joitaram Khusalbhai Patel was working as a Talati-cum-Mantri (Class-III) in the Sametri Gram- Panchayat and the accused No. 2 Chinubhai Mangaji Thakore was the sarpanch and both the accused were public servant. That late Chhagani Khodaji the father of the complainant Jilaji Chhaganji Thakore had property bearing survey No. 389/1 and 389/3 in the outskirts of Sametri Gram Panchayat and in the revenue record of 389/1 instead of the name of Chhaganji Khodaji, by mistake the name of Chhaganji Gokadji was written. That the complainant Jilaji Chhaganji Thakore had approached the accused no. 1 on 21.04.21993 and 22.04.1993 to mutate the correct name of Chhaganji Khodaji and at that time, the accused No. 1 had demanded an amount of Rs.200/- as illegal gratification and had told him to pay the amount of 23.04.1993. That the complainant approached the ACB Police Station, Ahmedabad (Rural) and Gandhinagar as the complainant did not want to pay the amount of illegal gratification and the complaint was registered as I-C.R.No. 4 of 1993 on 23.04.1993. That the trap laying officer called the panch witnesses and after explaining to them about the procedure of Anthracene powder and the UV lamp. A trap was laid and on 23.04.1993 at 16:15 hrs, in the presence of the panch witness No. 1, the accused No. 2 accepted the amount of illegal gratification near Rakhiyal Toll Point and the amount was recovered from his possession. That after due investigation and after the receipt of the sanction for prosecution from the competent authority, the Investigating Officer filed a charge sheet before the Special Judge, Ahmedabad (Rural), which was registered as Special (ACB) Case No. 3 of 2001.

2.2. That the accused was duly summoned and after following due procedure of Section 207 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, a charge at Exh: 12 was framed by the learned Trial Court against both the accused and the statements of the accused were recorded at Exh; 13 and Exh: 14 respectively. That both the accused denied the contents of the charge and the evidence of the prosecution was taken on record.

2.3. The prosecution has filed the following oral evidence as well as documentary evidences to bring home the charge against the accused.

ORAL EVIDENCE

DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCES