Proof of demand and acceptance of illegal gratification is essential for conviction under corruption laws, but can be established through direct or circumstantial evidence, including authenticated electronic recordings. Upon proof of acceptance, a statutory presumption shifts the burden to the accused to provide a credible explanation.

2024:BHC-NAG:7129 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.197 OF 2019 Sayyad Shakil Sayyad Salam, aged about 60 years, r/o Samruddhi Nagar, Takia Ward, Bhandara, tahsil and district Bhandara, (Maharashtra). ….. Appellant.

:: V E R S U S ::

The State of Maharashtra, Through Anti Corruption Bureau, Bhandara (Maharashtra). ….. Respondent.

===================================

Shri R.P.Joshi, Counsel for the Appellant.

Shri S.C.Joshi, Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

===================================

CORAM : URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J .

CLOSED ON : 30/04/2024 PRONOUNCED ON : 14/06/2024 JUDGMENT

1. By this appeal, the appellant (the accused) has challenged judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 28.2.2019 passed by learned Special Judge (under Prevention of Corruption Act), Bhandara (learned Judge of the trial court) in Special Criminal (ACB) Case No.18/2015 whereby he is convicted for offence punishable under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (the said Act) and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay fine Rs.5000/-, in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month. He is also convicted for offence punishable under Section 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the said Act and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay fine Rs.5000/-, in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month.

2. Brief facts of the prosecution case are as under:

The accused was serving as Round Officer in Forest Department at Nakadongari, tahsil Tumsar, district Bhandara. Complainant Dongarsingh Yadav was serving as Security Guard in Dongri/Buzrug Mines. The complainant had purchased some teak wood from a shop for making furniture to gift it in marriage of his relative. On 21.1.2015, when the complainant was on duty, the accused and other officials of the Forest Department conducted a raid at the house of the complainant. As wife of the complainant informed him about the said raid, he immediately came to the house and informed that he had purchased the teak wood from shop of one Hemraj Warkade at Tumsar. The officials of the Forest Department obtained signatures of his wife on some papers and told the complainant that crime would be registered against his wife. As per allegations, the accused demanded Rs.20.000/- for not initiating action and asked him to pay on or before 28.1.2015 and, therefore, he approached the office of the Anti Corruption Bureau (the office of the bureau) at Bhandara on 27.1.2015 and lodged a report.

3. After receipt of the complaint, officials of the bureau called two panchas. The complaint was read over to panchas and they have also obtained information of the complainant. The complainant was called on the next day i.e. 28.1.2015 with the bribe amount. The complainant produced fifteen currency notes of Rs.1000/- denomination and ten currency notes of Rs.500/- denomination. The demonstration as to anthracene powder and ultra violate lamp was shown to the complainant as well as panchas. The voice of pancha No.1 was recorded in Digital Voice Recorder. Accordingly, pre-trap panchanama was drawn.

4. On 28.1.2015, the complainant and pancha No.1 were sent to the office of the accused. The digital Voice Recorder was kept in left pocket of T-Shirt of the complainant. The complainant and pancha No.1 met the accused at Nakadongari. The communication as to the bribe amount took place between the complainant and the accused. The complainant requested the accused to reduce the amount. The accused has not accepted the same and, therefore, the complainant informed that he would come along with the bribe amount within an hour and, thereafter, they approached raiding party members who were present nearby at Shiv Mandir. They disclosed the communication to the trap officer. The officer of the bureau took out the digital tape recorder and heard the communication. The script of the said communication was drawn and, th