JUDGMENT:

Heard Sri K.V.Aditya Chowdary, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri S.Syam Sunder Rao, learned Special Public Prosecutor-cum-Standing Counsel representing the respondent/ACB.

2. The appeal is preferred by the convict/A-1 in the case, challenging the judgment dated 25.07.2006 rendered by the Special Court for SPE & ACB Cases, City Civil Courts at Hyderabad, in C.C.No.12/2001. The appellant/A-1 was found guilty of the offence U/secs.7 & 13(2) of the P.C.Act, 1988. He was convicted and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two (02) years and to pay fine of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only), in default, suffer simple imprisonment for six (06) months for the offence U/s.7 of the P.C.Act, 1988. He was sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two (02) years and to pay fine of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only), in default, suffer simple imprisonment for six (06) months for the offence U/s.13(2) of the P.C.Act, 1988.

CASE OF THE PROSECUTION

3. The case of the prosecution is that the appellant worked as Assistant Director, District Survey and Land Records, Kurnool, from 02.11.1999 to 26.05.2000. The accused (A-2) in the case worked as Attender under the appellant/A-1 during that period. The complainant Sri Buddanna retired from service as Typist in the office of District Survey and Land Records on medical invalidation on 24.04.2000. He intends to get an appointment for his son (P.W-3). Accordingly, he applied to the appellant/A-1 on 25.04.2000. He met the appellant several times for earlier appointment of his son.

4. On 23.05.2000, the complainant met the appellant at his office. The appellant/A-1 made demand for Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty-Five Thousand only) as gratification other than legal remuneration to appoint the son of the complainant. The complainant was unwilling to pay the amount. Therefore, he went to the office of ACB and presented Ex.P-1 report to P.W-6 i.e., Deputy Superintendent of Police, ACB, Kurnool Region. P.W-6 registered Ex.P-1 report as Ex.P-15 FIR in Cr.No.6/ACB-KUR/2000 and took-up investigation.

5. During investigation, P.W-6 conducted pre trap proceedings on 26.05.2000 in the presence of the complainant and mediators. Later, P.W-1 went to the office of the appellant. The trap team followed the complainant to the office of the appellant. The complainant went into the chambers of the appellant at about 12.10 p.m. The appellant reiterated the demand for giving order for appointment of P.W-3 as Typist. The complainant paid a sum of Rs.25,000/- towards gratification other than legal remuneration. The appellant asked the complainant to give the amount to the A-2, who is present in the chambers at that time. Therefore, A-2 received the amount on behalf of the appellant/A-1. The complainant came out and informed the trap team. Immediately, the trap team i.e., P.W-1 along with P.W-6 and others entered into the chambers of the appellant. They found the appellant and A-2 present in the chambers of the appellant. They questioned the appellant and A-2. Then complainant came into the chambers and narrated the happenings. Then, P.W-6 seized the gratification amount from the possession of A-2, conducted chemical test and A-2. It gave positive result. Therefore, P.W-6 recorded the happenings i.e., post trap happenings in the presence of P.Ws-1 and 6 under the cover of Ex.P-6. He conducted further investigation and seized record relating to the official favour (Exs.P-2 to P-4 and Exs.P-8 to P-12) etc. Later, Ex.P-13 was issued according to sanction for prosecution of the accused in the case. After conclusion of the investigation, successor of P.W-6 i.e., P.W-9 filed report before the Special Court against the appellant and attender as A-2 for the offence U/secs.7 and 13(2) of the P.C.Act, 1988.

6. The Special Court took cognizance for the above offence against the appellant and the other accused. The appellant/A-1 was charged for the offence U/secs.7 and 13(1)(d) r/w.13(2) of the P.C.Act, 1988. A-