The conviction under the Prevention of Corruption Act was overturned due to prosecutorial failures in evidence handling and record falsification, highlighting the need for integrity in judicial processes.

JUDGMENT :

(G. ILANGOVAN, J.)

This Criminal Appeal is filed against the conviction and sentence imposed by the Special Court for Trial of Cases under Prevention of Corruption Act , Sivagangai in Special CC No.24 of 2014, dated 27/04/2018

2. The case of the prosecution in brief:-

The first accused was working as Clerk in the Municipality Office, Sivagangai. On 12/01/2005 the complainant approached her for building survey licence with an application without enclosing any certificate and process fee. Thereafter, the complainant produced the necessary documents along with payment for process, on 21/05/2005. After passing 4 months, the first accused demanded a sum of Rs.2,000/- as bribe to process the application. The complainant requested her to reduce the bribe amount from Rs.2,000/- to Rs.1,700/-. Not wiling to bribe, on 19/05/2005, he lodged a complaint with the respondent police. Based upon the complainant, trap was laid. Case in Crime No.2 of 2009 was registered for the offence under section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act . The accused was arrested in the trap. After completing the formalities of the investigation, final report was filed. It was taken on file by the Special Court for Trial of cases under the Prevention of Corruption Act , Madurai, in Special Case No. 64 of 2011 for the offence under sections 7 and 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act , 1988. After completing Sec.207 Cr.P.C proceedings, framed the following charges against the accused:-

(1) On 29/08/2008 at about 07.00 pm, when the de-facto complainant gave a petition seeking for the plan approval licence, the first accused demanded Rs. 2000/- as bribe amount to make arrangement for such plan approval and thereby, she committed an offence punishable under section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act , 1988; and

(2) In pursuance of the same transaction, the accused by using her position as a public servant obtained Rs.2000/- as pecuniary advantage for herself from the complainant and thereby the accused committed an offence punishable under section 13(2) r/w 13(1) (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act , 1988.

3. To that charges, the accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

4. During the trial process, on the side of the prosecution, 16 witnesses have been examined and 41 documents were marked. Apart from that, MO1 to MO4 were marked, one witness was marked on the side of the accused.

5. PW2 completed the Civil Engineering and applied for licence on 12/01/2005 attached to Sivagangai Municipal Corporation. On 20/01/2005, he approached A1-Lalitha about the stage. At that time, he submitted a challan for deposit and licence fee. He submitted the relevant records and thereafter, for about 5 times, he approached A1. But there was no proper response from her. On 17/05/2005, along with his neighbour namely Kannan PW3, he again approached A1. At that time, she demanded Rs.2,000/- for doing the work. Again on 18/05/2005, A1 demanded money. They asked her to reduce the money. But she told that one Sakthivel, who is the higher official has to sign in the certificate. A1 took PW2 to Sakthivel. Sakthivel told him to give Rs. 1,700/- to A1 Lalitha.

6. On 19/05/2005 at about 02.00 pm, they approached the above Vigilance Department with a complaint under Ex.P6. Further event is spoken by the Inspector of Police namely PW14. He received the complaint and registered a case in Crime No.5 of 2005 under section 7 of Prevention of Corruption Act and submitted the original records to the court and copies to the higher officials. He made request to the Government Departments to depute two responsible persons to assist in the trap. As per the request, one Pandi and Parameswari appeared before him. He introduced PW2 to the Government Officials and explained the importance of the demonstration and etc. facts. PW2 handed over Rs.1,700/- consisting of three 500/- notes and two 100/- notes. A mahazar was prepared mentioning the serial number of the notes. Selava