THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL CRIMINAL APPEAL No.484 OF 2014

JUDGMENT:

This Criminal Appeal is filed by the appellant/complainant challenging the judgment dated 10.01.2014, passed by the learned First Additional Special Judge for SPE and ACB cases-cum-V Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Courts, Hyderabad (for short, ‘the trial Court’) in C.C.No.27 of 2011, whereby the learned Judge found the accused not guilty for the offences under Sections 7 and Section 13(1)(d) r/w 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (for short, ‘the Act, 1988’).

2. The brief facts of the case of the prosecution are as follows:

The accused was working as the Village Revenue Officer (VRO) for Namavaram village in Mothey Mandal of Nalgonda District from 2007 to 17.09.2010. The de facto complainant (PW.1) purchased 25 acres of land in Sy.Nos.784 and 785 of Namavaram village in the month of November, 2005 under an agreement of sale executed by his vendors Mr. Bushireddy Veera Reddy and others and the said land was deceptively sold by the same vendors subsequently to one Mr. Yerra Bhadra Reddy under a sale deed and also under an agreement of sale- cum-GPA. Aggrieved by the illegal alienation, PW.1 filed a civil suit challenging the transaction and also initiated the necessary proceedings before the RDO, Suryapet seeking the cancellation of the mutation order passed by the MRO/Tahsildar, Mothey Mandal effecting the mutation on the name of Mr. Yerra Bhadra Reddy. PW.11 the then RDO, Suryapet passed Ex.P14 order dated 27.03.2010 thereby setting aside the order passed by the MRO/Tahsildar, Mothey Mandal in respect of Ac.10.01 guntas of land by holding that the sale effect by way of an agreement of sale-cum-GPA in favour of Mr. Yerra Bhadra Reddy could not have conveyed a title to the said Mr. Yerra Bhadra Reddy and thereby ordered for incorporation of names of the original pattedars in respect of land in the name of Mr. Yerra Bhadra Reddy and keeping the mutation in respect of Acs.12.08 guntas of remaining land till the finality of the case pending before the Civil Court.

3. On 11.08.2010, PW.1 submitted Ex.P21 application to the office of PW.9 seeking for issuance of certified copies of the pahanies from the year 2004-2005 onward. On 28.08.2010 PW.1 approached the accused and requested him to expedite the process of issuing the certified copies of pahanies to PW.1, but the accused demanded for the payment of bribe of Rs.20,000/- for doing an official favour to PW.1 and made it clear to PW.1 that he would not act in expediting the process unless his demand for the payment of the bribe was met with. On 15.09.2010 PW.1 met the accused at his residence and renewed his request, but the accused stuck to his guns and insisted PW.1 to comply with his demand for the payment of the bribe and after much beseeching made by PW.1, the accused reduced the bribe amount to Rs.10,000/- and suggested to PW.1 to pay an installment of Rs.5,000/- before obtaining certified copies of the pahanies and the remaining amount after the receipt of the certified copies of the pahanies. In the meantime, PW.12 got made the discreet enquiries to ascertain the prima facie truthfulness of the contents of Ex.P1 and the antecedents of the accused and obtained the due permission from the DG, ACB, Hyderabad, PW.12 took the steps for securing PW.3 and LW.4, the two Government servants, to act as the mediators from the proposed trap of the accused. On 17.09.2010 at about 7:00 A.M, PW.12 registered Ex.P20 FIR against the accused in Crime No.23/ACB-HR/2010 for the offence under Section 7 of the Act and took up investigation. Necessary arrangements were made at that place under Ex.P7 report of pre-trap proceedings from 9:00 A.M to 10:15 A.M, for the intended trap of the accused, during which the proposed bribe amount of Rs.5,000/- produced by PW.1 was tainted with phenolphthalein powder. PW.1 took out the tainted cash from his left side shirt pocket and handed over the same to the accus