ORAL JUDGMENT

1. By the judgment and order dated 30.8.1996 passed by the Special Judge, Ahmedabad (Rural), Ahmedabad in Special (ACB) Case No.9 of 1990, the appellant was convicted for the offences punishable under section 13(1)(d)(ii) read with section 13 (2) and section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and sentenced to suffer one year simple imprisonment and a fine of Rs.5000/-, in default, simple imprisonment for 2 months' for offence under to section 13(1)(d)(ii) read with section 13 (2) of the Act. (for short, “the Act”). The appellant was also convicted for 6 months' simple imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs. 5,000/-, in default, simple imprisonment for two months for the offence under section 7 of the Act. The above sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

2. The appellant, being aggrieved by the said judgment and order of conviction and sentence of the learned Special Judge, Ahmedabad (Rural), carried the matter in appeal before this Court. This court, (Coram: A.N. Divecha, J.) (as He then was), by order dated 1.10.1996, dismissed the appeal. Against the said order, the appellant has filed Appeal being Criminal Appeal No.242 of 1997 before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The Supreme Court, vide its order dated 6.11.2003, allowed the appeal, set aside the order of the High Court and remitted the matter to the High Court to restore the appeal to its original file with a direction to consider the matter afresh in accordance with law within six months, after affording due opportunities to both the parties. Accordingly the appeal was placed before this court (Coram: Hon'ble Mr Justice S.R. Brahmbhatt). The appeal was admitted by that court and 15 days' time was granted to the office for preparation of the paper book. That is how the Registry of the High Court, after going through the procedure and after obtaining orders from the Hon'ble The Chief Justice, placed this appeal before this court for final disposal.

The facts necessary for disposal of the present appeal are as under:

3. The complainant-Somji Chhaganbhai Patel is son of Chhaganbhai Manibhai Patel. Chhaganbhai, who was originally resident of Kachchh District, purchased two plots of agricultural land bearing survey No.227 and 231 in the sim of Dehgam, after obtaining necessary permission from the competent authority. As they were farmers not residents of Dehgam, two tenancy cases bearing No. 6069 of 1984 and 6070 of 1984 were registered under section 84[C] of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 read with section 63 and 64 of the said Act. Both these cases were pending before the Mamlatdar and Krishi Panch, Dehgam.

4. The present appellant-accused was discharging his duties as Mamlatdar and Krishi Panch, Dehgam. He took charge as aforesaid on 15.2.1989 from his predecessor Mr Bhavsar. After taking charge of the office as Mamlatdar and Krishi Panch, he issued notices regarding all the pending cases. In the Tenancy cases against Chhaganbhai also notices were issued to remain present on 1.9.1989. Chhaganbhai could not remain present on 1.9.1989. Therefore, another notice was sent by the accused to remain present on 15.9.1989. As Chhaganbhai, father of the complainant is very aged person and is physically unfit, the complainant, who is looking after the agricultural work and the pending cases, remained present on 15.9.1989 with one Devram Premji, who is neighbour of the complainant whose agricultural land is also situated near the land of the complainant. The accused made enquiry regarding the case and the complainant informed him that, as his father is very old and physically unfit, he could not come in the office and, hence, he represents his father and that for assistance, he brought his neighbour Devram. The accused demanded the documents pertaining to the land. The complainant produced xerox copies of the documents. It is the case of the prosecution that, the witness Devrambhai told the accused that false case has been filed against the comp