IMPORTANT POINT
The prosecution must prove the accused's guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and the court has the power to re-appreciate evidence in an appeal against acquittal.

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 judgement and order of acquittal passed by the learned Special (ACB) Judge, Fast Track Court No. 4, Panchmahal at Godhra (hereinafter referred to as “the learned Trial Court”) in Special ACB Case No. 3 of 2003 on 13.01.2055, whereby, the learned Trial Court has acquitted the appellant for the offence punishable under Sections 7, 13(1)(d) and 13 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereafter referred to as “the PC Act” for short).

The respondent is hereinafter referred to as the accused as he stood in 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 was working as a clerk (Chokidar) In IRD Branch, Santrampur and was a public servant. That Kantaben Kishanbhai Mundwada had made an application under the Indira Awaas Yojna and an amount of Rs. 40,000/- was sanctioned out of which, two installments of Rs. 10,000/- each were given by cheque and the accused had taken 10% of the amount of cheque i.e. Rs. 1000/- each and in all Rs. 2000/- from the complainant Kishanbhai Rupabhai Mudhada. That the accused had demanded for an amount of Rs. 2000/- being 10% of the remaining amount of Rs. 2,00,000/- and the amount was to be paid on 13.02.2003. That the complainant did not want to pay the amount of illegal gratification and hence, the complainant filed the complaint with the ACB Police Station, Panchmahal at Godhra which was registered at C.R. No. 1/2003 under Sections 7, 13(1)(d) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. That the panch witnesses were called and the necessary procedure due was done and the trap was arranged at the Taluka Panchayat Office, Santrampur where the accused demanded for the amount of Rs. 2000/- in the presence of the panch witness and after the predetermined signal was given, the members of the raiding party came and the accused was caught red handed. That the Investigating Officer recorded the statements of the connected witnesses, drew the necessary panchnama and after a detailed investigation, the charge-sheet was filed against the present accused before the Sessions Court, Godhra which came be registered as Special ACB Case No. 3/2003.

2.2 The accused was 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. 9 was framed against the accused and the statement of the accused was recorded at Exh. 10, wherein, the accused 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.

2.4 The prosecution has produced the following documentary evidences in support of their case.

2.5 After the learned APP filed the closing pursis at Exh. 36, the further statement of the accused under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was recorded and after the arguments of the learned APP and the learned advocate for the accused were heard, the learned Trial Court by an impugned judgement and order dated 13.01.2005 was pleased to acquit the accused from all the offences.

3. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with