IMPORTANT POINT
The judgment underscores the requirement for evidence to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt and the importance of valid prosecution sanction.

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 passed by the learned Special Judge, Fast Track Court No. 1, Gandhidham (hereinafter referred to as “the learned Trial Court”) in Special Case No. 22 of 1999 on 11.03.2005, whereby, the learned Trial Court has acquitted the respondents for the offence punishable under Sections 7, 12, 13(1)(d) and 13 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereafter referred to as “the PC Act” for short) and Section 477 of Indian Penal Code.

The respondents are hereinafter referred to as the accused as they stood in the rank and file 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 the accused no. 1 was working as a Medical Officer, Class-II in the Community Health Centre, Rapar – Kutch and the accused no. 2 was working as a Officer, Class-I in the Community Health Centre, Rapar – Kutch and both the accused were public servants. That Bhavnaben Chitranjanbhai Acharya – the wife of the complainant Chitranjanbhai Nanalal Acharya had gone on 01.05.1990 in the OPD of Community Health Centre, Rapar and was examined by the accused no. 1 and she was to be admitted on 02.05.1990 for a Curettage Procedure. That the accused no. 1 had demanded for an illegal gratification of Rs. 500/- and on 03.05.1990, the complainant and his wife met the accused no. 1 and told her that Rs. 500/- was excessive and hence, the accused no. 1 demanded for an amount of Rs. 200/- and told the complainant to give the amount of illegal gratification of Rs. 200/- on 05.05.1990 at her house. That the complainant did not want to pay the amount of illegal gratification and hence, the complainant went to the ACB Police Station, Bhuj, District Kutch and filed the complaint which was registered at C.R. No. 4/1990 on 06.05.1990 under Sections 7, 12, 13(1)(d) and 13(2) of the PC Act and under Section 477 of Indian Penal Code. That the panch witnesses were called and experiment of anthracene powder and the ultraviolet lamp was explained and carried out in the presence of panch witnesses and the complainant and the trap was laid and the complainant and the shadow witness went to the house of the accused. That at that time, the accused no. 2 was at home and the accused no. 2 wrote a prescription and gave it to the complainant and at that time, the accused no. 2 demanded the amount of illegal gratification which was given by the complainant to the accused no. 2 and the accused no. 2 accepted the amount and put it in his pocket. That the complainant gave the predetermined signal and the members of the raiding party came and the accused no. 2 was caught red handed. That the Investigating Officer recorded the statements of the connected witnesses and collected the necessary documentary evidences including the sanction for prosecution of the accused and the charge-sheet came to be filed before the Sessions Court, Kutch at Bhuj which was registered as Special Case No. 126/1992.

2.2 The accused were duly served with the summons and the accused appeared before the learned Trial Court, and after the procedure under Section 207 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was followed, a charge at Exh. 6 was framed against the accused and the statements of the accused were recorded at Exhs. 7 and 8 respectively, wherein, the accused have denied all the contents of the charge and the entire evidence of the prosecution was taken on record.

2.3 The prosecution has produced the following oral evidences in support of their case.