THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL CRIMINAL APPEAL No.620 OF 2014

JUDGMENT:

1. The appellant was convicted for the offences under Sections 7 and 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (for short ‘the Act’) and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months and one year, respectively, vide judgment in C.C.No.99 of 2010 dated 22.05.2014 passed by the II Additional Special Judge for SPE & ACB Cases, Hyderabad. Aggrieved by the same, present appeal is filed.

2. The prosecution's case, in brief, is as follows:

P.W.1 is the de facto complainant, on whose complaint a trap was laid against the appellant. The appellant was working as a Senior Assistant in the office of the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Karimnagar, from 18.12.2004 to 27.12.2005. P.W.2 is a civil contractor. On 07.12.2004, the Municipal Corporation, Karimnagar, allotted a contract to P.W.2 for laying a pathway in Deer Park under the ISMT Scheme, with an estimated value of Rs. 3,85,221/-. P.W.1, being the authorized agent of P.W.2, was entrusted with the execution of the work, as per the authorization letter marked as Ex.P1. P.W.1 completed 60% of the work. A bill for Rs. 2,00,097/- was prepared by the Public Health Department and sent to the Municipal Commissioner’s office, where the file was processed and a cheque (Ex.P8) was prepared and signed by the Municipal Commissioner. However, the cheque required a counter-signature by the Regional Deputy Director, Town and Country Planning, Warangal.

3. Although P.W.4 and the Municipal Commissioner instructed the appellant to obtain the counter-signature, he failed to do so. Subsequently, P.Ws.1 and 2 approached the appellant multiple times, requesting him to obtain the required signature, but he demanded a bribe of Rs. 3,000/-, at the rate of 1% of the sanctioned amount.

4. Unwilling to pay the bribe, P.W.1 approached the DSP, ACB, Karimnagar Range (L.W.10), and submitted a complaint (Ex.P2), based on which a case was registered in Crime No.18/ACB- KNR/2005 under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act. FIR (Ex.P14) was issued, and investigation was taken up by L.W.10.

5. During the investigation, L.W.10 secured the presence of mediators—P.W.3 and G. Raji Reddy (L.W.2)—and prepared the pre-trap proceedings (Ex.P5). A trap was laid with the assistance of P.W.6, Inspector, ACB, Adilabad.

6. On 27.12.2005, around 11:40 AM, P.W.1 went to the office of the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Karimnagar. Upon seeing P.W.1, the appellant inquired whether he had brought the bribe amount. When P.W.1 replied in the affirmative, the appellant asked him to hand over the bribe for obtaining the counter-signature on the joint cheque of Rs. 2,97,577/-, which had already been signed by the Commissioner on 18.11.2005. Upon receiving the bribe of Rs. 3,000/-, the appellant accepted the money and placed it on his office table.

7. Following the pre-arranged signal, L.W.10, along with the mediators and staff, entered the appellant’s office and caught him red-handed. Chemical tests on both of the appellant’s hands were positive (vide MOs.3 and 4). The tainted amount (MO.5) was recovered from the office table at the instance of the appellant. L.W.10 also seized other material objects (MOs.1 to 6) and documents (Exs.P6 to P10), and post-trap proceedings were recorded under Ex.P12.

8. On behalf of the prosecution, P.Ws.1 to 6 were examined and Exhibits P1 to P14 and Material Objects (MOs) 1 to 6 were marked. On behalf of the defence, D.Ws.1 and 2 were examined, and Exhibits D1 to D4 were marked.

9. The learned Special Judge, based on the oral and documentary evidence adduced by both sides, rejected the defence put forth by the appellant that no official favour was pending. The court concluded that the appellant had demanded and accepted the bribe amount and accordingly convicted and sentenced him to imprisonment, as stated above. Aggrieved by the same, the present appeal has been filed.

10. The lear