Allegation of taking illegal gratification proved against accused/appellant;

The accused in C.C.No.16 of 1990 on the file of the District Judge-cum-Chief Judicial Magistrate, Krishnagiri, is the appellant.

2. The accused/appellant was employed as Junior Assistant (B-3 Section), Taluk Office, Harur. In the said office, he was handling B-3 Section, which deals with the issuance of Community Certificate. The defacto complainant-Velliangiri having filed an application for obtaining Community Certificate approached the accused/appellant and it seems for processing the file and for issuing certificate, the accused demanded a sum of Rs.400/-originally, then reduced the same to Rs.300/- on 23. 1989 which was agreed to by the defacto complainant to be given on the next day. However, the defacto complainant reported the matter to the Vigilance and Anti Corruption Department, who have arranged a trap proceedings. In the trap proceedings, the amount demanded by the accused, accepted by him were established, leading to investigation of the case, preceded by registration of the crime. Thus accusing, the respondent has filed a case before the court concerned seeking appropriate punishment since the accused/appellant being a public servant, committed the offences under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) r/w 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and Section 201 of I.P.C., after obtaining necessary permission from the authorities concerned.

3. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate-cum-Additional District Judge by going through the final report as well as the connected materials, felt the necessity to frame charges against the accused, since the materials were so sufficient and thus framing, when questioned the accused, disputed the case, pleading not guilty.

4. In order to make out a case and to send the public servant behind the bar, 12 witnesses have been marched in supported by 21 documents and 20 material objects.

5. The learned trial Judge evaluated the above materials applying the provisions of law also, which brought to surface that the charges framed against the accused are proved beyond all reasonable doubt. Thus concluding the accused being a public servant not only demanded illegal gratification i.e. other than the legal remuneration, but also accepted the same, which should come within the meaning of criminal misconduct, the learned Judge found the accused guilty, convicted and sentenced him to undergo one year R.I. and a fine of Rs.500/- in default to undergo two months R.I. for the offences under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) r/w 13(2) of the Act and Section 201 of I.P.C. each, ordering the imprisonment to run concurrently, which are impugned in this criminal appeal.

6. Facts so essential leading to the final report ending in conviction followed by this appeal briefly as follows:

(a) In the month of March, the accused/appellant-public servant was working as Junior Assistant – B3 Section, Taluk Office, Harur. P.W.1–Velliangiri, who belongs to Kongu Vellalar Community, approached the Taluk Office by preferring Ex.P1 elsewhere in the month of January 1989 for the issuance of Community Certificate accompanied with P.W.2 Ulaganathan. Since the accused/appellant was dealing the file, both of them approached him on 23. 1989 at about 10.30 a.m. in order to ascertain the position of the file. At that time, the accused demanded from P.W.1 that he should pay a sum of Rs.400/-, which includes the amount payable to the higher authorities also, in order to issue a community certificate. The bargain resulted in a reduction of Rs.100/- and in this view, at the request of the accused, P.W.1 agreed to pay a sum of Rs.300/- on 23. 1989.

(b) P.W.1 not willing to give bribe approached the Vigilance and Anti Corruption Department and preferred Ex.P.2 complaint to P.W.12. On receipt of Ex.P.2, P.W.12 registered a case in Cr.No.1/AC/89 and submitted the printed F.I.R-Ex.P.21 to the Chief Judicial Magistrate. Thereafter, he sent for two official witnesses including P.W.3 and they were introduced to P.W.1 explaining the cases, g