JUDGMENT :

S.V. PINTO, J.

1. This appeal has been filed by the appellant-State under Section 378(1)(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Code’) against the judgment and order of acquittal dated 01.03.2006 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, 7th Fast Track Court, Palanpur (hereinafter referred to as ‘the learned Trial Court’) in Special Case No. 166 of 1999, whereby, the learned Trial Court has acquitted the respondents from the offences punishable under Sections 7, 12, 13(1)(D)(1)(2)(3) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act (hereinafter referred to as ‘the P.C. Act’). The respondents are hereinafter referred to as ‘the accused No. 1’ and ‘the accused No. 2” at they stood in the original case for the sake of convenience, clarity and brevity.

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

2.1. That Udaji Hiraji Brahman, the father of Chenaji Udaji Brahman - the complainant, resident of village Bhalasara, Taluka Tharad, Distrcit Banaskantha had an agricultural land and a well in the land and also an electric motor on the well. That a residential house was constructed on the said land and an application for electric connection for the house was given to the office of the Gujarat Electricity Board (hereinafter referred to ‘the GEB”) at Dhanera. That on 02.05.1999, the accused had come to the agricultural land with a jeep and at that time the complainant, his father Udaji Hiraji Bhrahman and his brother Shamalbhai were present and at that time, the accused conducted the survey of the house and demanded an amount of illegal gratification of Rs. 1,000/- for giving the estimate of Rs. 2,000/- and if the amount of illegal gratification of Rs. 1,000/- was not paid, then, an estimate of Rs. 4,000/- was to be given. That after bargaining, the amount of Rs. 500/- as illegal gratification was fixed and the accused No. 1 told them to come to the GEB office, Dhanera during office hours and give him the amount of illegal gratification of Rs. 500/-. That as the complainant did not want to give the amount of illegal gratification, he went to the ACB office at Palanpur and filed the complaint, which was registered as C.R. No. 5 of 1999 on 03.05.1999 under sections 7, 12, 13(1)(d) 1, 2, 3 and 13(2) of the P.C. Act. That the Trap Laying Officer called the panch witnesses and after explaining to the complainant and the panch witnesses about the procedure of anthracene powder and ultraviolet lamp, the trap was laid on 03.05.1999 and at 4.45 hours, the demand of illegal gratification for Rs. 500/- was made by the accused No. 1 and accepted by the accused No. 2 and the same was recovered from the possession of the accused No. 2. That the accused No. 1 was working as Junior Engineer at GEB office and was a public servant and the accused No. 2 was a private person and had accepted the amount of illegal gratification and after due investigation, a charge sheet came to be filed before the learned Sessions, Banaskantha at Palanpur, which was registered as Special Case No. 166 of 1999.

2.2 The accused were duly summoned and the accused appeared before the learned Trial Court and after following the procedure under section 207 of the Code, a charge was framed against the accused at Exh.12 and statements of accused were recorded at Exh.13 and 14 respectively and both the accused denied all the charges and the evidence of the produced on record.

2.3. The prosecution has filed the following oral as well as documentary evidence to prove the charges against the accused:

Documentary Evidence: