Proof of demand and acceptance of illegal gratification is a sine qua non for conviction under the anti-corruption laws. In an appeal against acquittal, the appellate court shall not interfere unless the trial court's findings are perverse, as the acquittal reinforces the accused's presumption of innocence.

FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:

HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE S.V. PINTO Sd/-

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

Approved for Reporting Yes No

√

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

ORAL JUDGMENT

1. This appeal has been filed by the appellant – State under Section 378(1)(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the judgment and the order of acquittal passed by the learned Special Judge & Presiding Officer, 1st Fast Track Court, Junagadh (hereinafter referred to as ‘the learned Trial Court’) in Special Case (ACB) No.47 of 1999 on 13.05.2010, whereby, the learned Trial Court has acquitted the respondent – original accused from the offences punishable under Sections 7, 13(1)(d) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the P.C.Act’).

1.1. The respondent hereinafter is referred to as ‘the accused’ as he stood in the original case, for the sake of convenience, clarity and brevity.

2. The relevant facts leading to filing of the present appeal are as under:

2.1. The accused was working as a Deputy Auditor in the office of the Assistant Examiner, Amreli, in January, 1999 and was a Public Servant. The complainant, Nasharinben, daughter of Ibrahimbhai Salim Ahmed Dalla, was a Press Reporter and her cousin sister Mehrunnisha Shakurbhai Palwala was working as a Teacher in the Primary School at Jaisangpara had retired on superannuation on 31.05.1998. Her pension papers had to be processed and the complainant had gone to inquire from the accused about the pension papers of her cousin sister on a number of occasions, and at that time, the accused had demanded an amount of Rs.1000/- as illegal gratification for processing the pension papers of Mehrunnisha Shakurbhai Palwala. After bargaining, the amount was settled at Rs.500/- and the accused told the complainant to come after 03.07.1999 and he would complete the pension case. On 05.01.1999, the complainant met the accused and the accused called her to the office after 3:00p.m. and told her that he would keep the pension papers and the order ready and once again demanded the amount of Rs.500/-. She telephoned her cousin Mehrunnisha Shakurbhai Panwala and called her and as the complainant did not want to give the amount of illegal gratification, she went to the ACB Police Station at Amreli and the complaint of the complainant was recorded.

2.2. The Trap Laying Officer called the panch witnesses and the complainant gave 10 currency notes of the denomination of Rs.50/- each. Head Constable J.P.Parmar under instructions of the Trap Laying Officer conducted the demonstration of anthracene powder and ultraviolet lamp and explained the characteristics of the same to the complainant and the panch witnesses. All the currency notes were smeared with anthracene powder and the complainant had a plastic bag in her hand, in which, she had a black purse consisting of some papers and some loose currency notes and one portion of the purse was empty. Head Constable J.P.Parmar placed the currency notes smeared with anthracene powder in the empty portion of the purse after folding the currency notes and the purse was closed by the complainant and necessary instructions to all concerned was given and the Panchdama Part-1 was drawn. As decided, the complainant, panch witnesses and members of the raiding party left the ACB Office at about 16:20 hours and went to the Office of the Assistant Examiner, Amreli and the complainant and the panch witness met the accused. The complainant told the accused that they had received the pension order, but she did not understand how the pension should be taken and asked him to explain the s