Under the Prevention of Corruption Act, mere recovery of bribes does not suffice for conviction without demonstrable proof of demand, especially if the complainant turns hostile.

JUDGMENT:

K. Surender, J.

1. Criminal Appeal No.375 of 2012 was filed by A1 and Criminal Appeal No.376 of 2012 was filed by A2. Criminal Appeal No.377 of 2012 was filed by A3. Since A3 died, Criminal Appeal No.377 of 2012 stands abated.

2. A1, A2 and A3 were convicted for the offences under Sections 7 and Section 13 (2) r/w 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and two years, each, respectively under both counts and A3 was convicted for the offence under Section 13 (2) r/w 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year vide judgment in C.C.No.17 of 2007 dated 20.04.2012 passed by the First Additional Special Judge for SPE and ACB Cases-cum-V Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. Both the appeals filed by A1 and A2 are heard together and disposed off by way of this Common Judgment.

3. A1 worked as Town Planning Officer, A2 worked as Town Planning Supervisor and A3 as attender in the Qutbullahpur Municipality office. Briefly, the facts of the case are that the defacto complainant is P.W.1 namely Mohd.Moinuddin. He purchased a plot bearing No.1 admeasuring 167 sq.yds in Venkatram Nagar Colony at Suraram, in the year 1997 in the name of his mother Smt.Sadath Bee. About six months prior to complaint, NSR Raju constructed a compound wall by occupying the road and caused obstruction to their ingress into their plot by claiming that he was issued with a patta certificate for the said land by the Revenue Authorities. P.W.1 approached Junior Civil Judge Court Medchal, Ranga Reddy District and filed a case vide OS No.369 of 2005 and on 16.11.2005, the same was decreed by the Court in their favour by issuing perpetual injunction.

4. P.W.1 approached the Revenue and Municipal Officials several times and shown the Court order and requested for taking necessary action for the removal of the illegal construction. Again, on 14.02.2006, Raju started construction of room in the same place. Immediately, P.W.1 approached Jeedimetla Police Station and lodged complaint. He also lodged complaint at Qutbullahpur Municipality by enclosing registration document, HUDA layout and Court Order pertaining to his plot and requested them to stop the illegal construction and dismantle the existing wall. The then Commissioner, Qutubullahpur Municipality/P.W.3 forwarded his application to the Town Section. On 20.03.2006, when P.w.1 went to the Town Planning Section and enquired with A1 about his work, A1 demanded him to pay an amount of Rs.10,000/- to him and another Rs.10,000/- to A2 in order to complete the work of dismantling the illegal construction as requested by him.

5. On 22.03.2006 at 11.00 hours, P.W.1 went to the Municipality, Qutubullapur, and met both A1 and A2 and pleaded for the completion of his work. But both of them stuck to their earlier demand of bribe amount of Rs.10,000/- each for site inspection, for sending their report and also for removal of the illegal construction. Since P.W.1 was not willing to pay bribe to A1 & A2, he lodged a written complaint with P.W.7-DSP, ACB, Hyderabad on 23.03.2006 requesting to take action against A1 & A2. After verifying the contents of the complaint, P.W.7 registered a case in Cr.No.7/ACB-HR/2006 under Section 7 and Section 13 (1)(d) r/w 13(2) of the Act on 24.03.2006 at 9.30 a.m. On the same day,