JUDGMENT

K. Lakshman, J. - Criminal Appeal No.1021 is preferred by the appellant - Accused Officer No.1, feeling aggrieved by the judgment, dated 28.07.2006, passed by the Principal Special Judge for SPE & ACB Cases - cum - IV Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, in Calendar Case No.27 of 2001, while Criminal Appeal No.1022 is preferred by Accused Officer No.2.

2. Vide the aforesaid judgment, the trial Court found both the Accused Officers guilty of the charges under Sections 7 and 13 (1) (d) read with 13 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (for short 'Act') and accordingly sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/- and in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for one month each for the charge under Section 7 of the Act. The trial Court also sentenced the Accused Officers to undergo the very same quantum of punishment for the charge under Section 13 (1) (d) read with 13 (2) of the Act each.

3. The first charge levelled against Accused officer Nos.1 and 2 are that they being public servants employed as Junior Assistant and Senior Assistant respectively in the office of District Coordinator of Hospital Services, Hyderabad District, King Koti, Hyderabad, on 03.11.1998, at their office, have demanded bribe from PW.1. In pursuance of the same, Accused Officer No.1 accepted the bribe amount of Rs.2,000/- viz., @ Rs.1,000/- each from PW.1 - Mr. G. Harinath Babu, Junior Assistant in the office of the Government Civil Dispensary, Punjagutta, Hyderabad, as illegal gratification other than legal remuneration for doing official favour of getting exoneration from the charges, settle the bills of PW.1 and also for getting eight years special grade increment, and thereby both of them committed the charge under Section 7 of the Act. Yet another charge levelled against Accused Officer Nos.1 and 2 is that both of them by corrupt or illegal means or otherwise abusing their positions as public servants obtained for themselves pecuniary advantage to an extent of Rs.2,000/- from PW.1 as a motive or reward for doing the said official favour, and thereby both of them committed the offence under Section 13 (1) (d) read with 13 (2) of the Act.

4. The factual matrix of the case of the prosecution is as under:

(i) Mr. G. Harinath Babu - de facto complainant, PW.1 was Junior Assistant in the office of the Government Civil Dispensary, Panjasha, near Charminar, Hyderabad, at the relevant point of time. Earlier while he was working in Community Hospital, Tandoor, a charge memo was issued to him alleging that he did not attend the Audit Inspection, for which he has submitted his reply. Having not satisfied with the explanation submitted by PW.1, the Disciplinary Authority has appointed Dr. Nityananda Swamy as Enquiry Officer to enquire into the charges levelled against him. Once PW.1 attended the enquiry in 1996 and thereafter he do not know the further proceedings thereof.

(ii) On 27.10.1998, he received a memo from the Disciplinary Authority calling for his explanation as to why three increments should not be stopped. Thereafter, PW.1 requested the Disciplinary Authority to permit him to go through the inquiry report by way of submitting a letter dated 03.11.1998. PW.1 went to District Coordinator Office, King Koti to submit the letter dated 03.11.1998 for verification of inquiry report, Accused Officer No.1, Junior Assistant and Accused Officer No.2, Senior Assistant (Esst.3) called him and informed that the charge memo issued to him while he was working in Kamatipura was got closed, and for the purpose of closing the charge memo in respect of Tandoor office and also to release 8 years (SPG) Increment, they have demanded an amount of Rs.5,000/- towards bribe. PW.1 requested them that he is not in a position to pay the said amount, for which they have informed that they have already put up a note and get the favour done.

(iii) On the request of PW.1, Accused Officer Nos.1 and 2 have