IMPORTANT POINT
The prosecution must prove the demand and acceptance of illegal gratification beyond reasonable doubt to establish guilt under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

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 against the judgment and order of acquittal in Special Case No. 06 of 2000 passed by the learned Special Judge and Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court No. 2, Gondal (hereinafter referred to as ‘the learned Trial Court’) on 15.10.2007, whereby, the learned Trial Court has acquitted the respondents from the offences punishable under Sections 7, 12, 13(1)(d) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the P.C. Act’). The respondents are hereinafter referred to as ‘the accused’ at they stood in the rank and file of the original case for the sake of convenience, clarity and brevity.

2. The relevant facts leading to filing the conviction appeal are as under:

2.1. That the accused No. 1 was working as Assistant Sub Inspector and the accused No. 2 was working as an Unarmed Police Constable in the Dhoraji Police Station, Dhoraji, District Rajkot. The accused Nos. 1 and 2, in connivance with each other, were halting the truck under the pretext of checking and were threatening the truck drivers to detain the truck and were collecting amount of Rs. 50/- and more from the truck drivers. That secret information was received by the Police Inspector, ACB Police Station, Rajkot and he filed a complaint on 30.01.2000, which was registered at ACB Police Station, Rajkot being C.R. No. 2 of 2000. The panch witnesses were called and after explaining to the panch witnesses about the use of anthracene powder and ultraviolet lamp test, the experiment was done and Sukhabhai Mumabhai Kaladavra, the driver of truck bearing No. GJ-12-V-5097 was halted and was made to understand the trap details. That he consented to be a decoy punter and the panch witnesses and the members of the raiding party sat in the truck and when the truck reached near the railway track at Dhoraji, the accused halted the truck and demanded Rs. 50/- as illegal gratification and instructed the accused No. 2 to accept the same and at that time, the members of the raiding party and the Trap Laying Officer caught both the accused red handed. After a detailed investigation, a charge sheet came to be filed before the learned Sessions Court, Rajkot, which was registered as Special (ACB) Case No. 6 of 2000.

2.2. The accused were duly served with the summons and the accused appeared before the learned Trial Court and after the due procedure under Section 207 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, a charge was framed against all the accused at Exh.23 and the statements of the accused were recorded at Exh.24 to 25 respectively, wherein, both the accused denied the offences mentioned in the charge and the oral as well as the documentary evidence of the prosecution were taken on record. The prosecution examined 7 witnesses and produced 18 documentary evidence to bring home the charge against the accused and after the closing pursis was filed by the learned APP at Exh.54, the further statements of the accused under Section 313 of the Code were recorded, wherein, the accused denied all the evidence produced by the prosecution. After hearing the arguments of both the sides, the learned Trial Court did not find the accused guilty and acquitted both the accused under Section 235(1) of the Code, by the impugned judgment and order dated 15.10.2007.

3. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Trial Court in Special (ACB) Case No. 6 of 2000, the appellant-State has filed the present appeal mainly contending that the learned Trial Court has failed in appreciating the oral as well as the documentary evidence produced by the prosecution on record and the witnesses have fully supported the case of the prosecution but the same has not been appreciated by the learned Trial Court. The accused have been caught red handed and the tainted currency note of Rs. 50/- was found from the accused No. 2.