IMPORTANT POINT
The judgment emphasizes the importance of proving demand and acceptance of illegal gratification and the need for reliable and corroborative evidence in bribery cases.

JUDGMENT :

S.V. Pinto, J.

1. This appeal has been filed by the appellants – original accused under Section 374 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the judgement and order of conviction passed by the learned Judge and Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court No. 5, Surat (hereinafter referred to as “the learned Trial Court”) in Special ACB Case No. 16/1995 on 06.12.2006, whereby, the learned Trial Court was pleased to convict the accused and sentence the accused no. 1 to rigorous imprisonment of two years and fine of Rs. 5,000/- and in default, simple imprisonment for one month for the offence punishable under Sections 7, 12, 13(1)(d) 1, 2, 3 and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as “the PC Act”) and the accused no. 2 to rigorous imprisonment of six months and fine of Rs. 1,000/- and in default, simple imprisonment of one month for the offence punishable under Section 12 of the PC Act.

1.1 Criminal Appeal No. 193/2007 has been filed by the State under Section 377 of Code of Criminal Procedure for enhancement of the sentence passed by the learned Judge and Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court No. 5, Surat in Special ACB Case No. 16/1995 on 06.12.2006.

1.2 Criminal Appeal No. 2306/2006 and Criminal Appeal No. 193/2007 have arisen out of the same impugned judgement and order passed by the learned Trial Court in Special ACB Case No. 16/1995 on 06.12.2006 and hence, both the appeals have been disposed of by this common judgement.

1.3 The appellants of Criminal Appeal No. 2306/2006 and respondents of Criminal Appeal No. 193/2007 are referred as the accused in the rank and file as 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 the accused no. 1 was working as a Police Constable in the Umarpada Out Post of Mangrol Police Station in the year 1994 and was a public servant and the accused no. 2 was a private person. That one Amarsing Rupabhai Vasava had filed an application against Shamsing K. Vasava – the nephew of the complainant Amarsingbhai Radaviyabhai Vasava in the Umarpada Out Post of Mangrol Police Station on 27.08.1994 and both the parties were called to the Umarpada Out Post at 11.00 hours on 30.07.1994. That the Sarpanch of Chichipatal village – Samsungbhai Chiriyabhai was the mediator and had compromised the matter and at that time, the accused no. 1 had told the complainant that they would have to pay an amount of Rs. 1,000/- as illegal gratification for police expenses and for not filing the case against four persons. That the nephew of the complainant – Shamsingbhai K. Vasava intervened and stated that he had only Rs. 100/- and the complainant called Babubhai Jethiyabhai Chaudhary to the Out Post and the accused no. 1 told them to give the amount of Rs. 1,000/- at 10.00 hours on 31.07.1994, else they all would be arrested and behind the bars. That the accused no. 1 accepted the amount of Rs. 100/- from Shamsing K. Vasava – the nephew of the complainant and on 31.07.1994, the complainant met the accused no. 1 and told him that they could not arrange for the amount but the accused no. 1 told them to sell their jewellery and if the amount of Rs. 900/- could not be given at one time, to pay an amount of Rs. 500/- first and thereafter, to pay the remaining amount after a week. That once again on 03.08.1994 at 18.00 hours, the accused no. 1 met the complainant at Umarpada Crossroads and demanded for the amount of Rs. 500/- to be paid on the next day at around 3.30 pm. That the complainant did not want to pay the amount of illegal gratification and hence, the complainant went to the ACB Police Station, Surat and filed the complaint under Sections 7, 12, 13(1)(d), 1, 2, 3 and 13(2) of the PC Act which was registered at C.R. no. 5/1994 on 04.08.1994. That the Trap Laying Officer called the panch witnesses and the demonstration of anthracene powder and the ultraviolet lamp was conducte