THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V. VENUGOPAL

CRIMINAL APPEAL No.123 OF 2014

JUDGMENT:

This Criminal Appeal is filed questioning the acquittal for

the offence under Sections 7 and 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (for short, “the Act”) of the Respondent/Accused Officer herein, in C.C.No.26 of 2009 on the file of the learned I Additional Special Judge for SPE & ACB Cases, Hyderabad (Crime No.06/ACB-HR/2008 on the file of the

ACB, Hyderabad Range).

2. Heard Mr.P.Ramachandra Reddy, learned Standing Counsel and Special Public Prosecutor for Appellant-ACB and Mr.Sudhakar Reddy Maddula, learned counsel for respondent-

accused.

3. The brief facts of the case are that respondent/accused worked as the Assistant Engineer in Panchayath Raj Department in Telkapally Mandal of Mahabubnagar District from 25.08.2004 to 02.05.2008; that by virtue of the post held by him, he was a Public Servant within the meaning of Section 2(c) of the Act. It is stated that the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of the Zilla Parishad, Mahabubnagar sanctioned an amount of Rs.2,50,000/-

for construction of B.C.Community Hall for Yadava Sangham in Gattunellikkuduru Village in Telkapally Mandal; that the said work as was allotted to the de facto complainant/PW1 for construction on the nomination of work made by the Executive Engineer, Panchayath Raj Department (PW6); that on 01.12.2007, an agreement was entered into by PW1 with PW6 and as per the terms of the said agreement, the work was scheduled to be completed within six months from the date of the said agreement; that PW1 completed the work within the stipulated time and he received a part of the amount of Rs.1,30,000/- from the Panchayath Raj Department; that on completion of the work, a remaining amount of Rs.1,20,000/- was due to him; accused was supervising the work of PW1 by noting the measurements in the Measurements Book (Ex P10) and was also preparing the bills meant to be forwarded to the Office of the Executive Engineer (PW6) for the purpose of the grant of the amount payable to PW1.

4. It is stated that on 21.04.2008, PW1 approached the accused at his residence in Nagarkurnool and requested him to take the measurements of his work and prepare a bill so as to forward the same to the Executive Engineer and that the accused demanded for the payment of a bribe of Rs.10,000/- for doing the work; that on 26.04.2008 PW1 again approached the accused at the residence of the latter and renewed his request, but the accused still repeated his demand for the payment of the bribe. After several entreaties made by PW1, the accused reduced the bribe amount to Rs.7,000/- but made it clear to PW1 that the work of PW1 would not be done unless the demand of the accused was met with; that PW1 was reluctant to pay the bribe amount to the accused and hence, on 29.04.2008, he went to the office of PW9 in Hyderabad, where he submitted Ex P1 report to PW9. PW9 directed PW1 to come to the office of the Inspector, ACB, Mahabubnagar on 01.05.2008 and to bring the proposed bribe amount of Rs.7,000/- with him. In the meantime, PW9 got made discreet enquiries about the truthfulness of the contents of Ex P1 and having been satisfied about the prima facie truthfulness of those contents and after getting the approval from the DG, ACB, Hyderabad, PW9 registered Ex P14/FIR against the accused on 01.05.2008 at the office of the Inspector, ACB, Mahabubnagar.

5. It is further stated that PW9 also got secured PW3 and LW3, the two Government Servants working in Animal Husbandry Department to act as the mediators for the intended trap of the accused; that necessary arrangements were made in the office of the Inspector, ACB, Mahabubnagar from 10:00 A.M. to 10:45 A.M. on 01.05.2008 as noted in Ex P5 report of the pre-trap proceedings by PW3 for the intended trap of the accused during which, the tainted cash of Rs.7,000/- smeared with phenolphthalein powder was kept in the left side shirt pocket of PW1 with a clear instruction to h