Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Ashanand Ramji Fulekar, was convicted by the 1st Additional Principal Judge and Special Judge (CBI) on 28.1.2009 for an offence punishable under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, and sentenced to 2 years RI and fine. The appellant challenged the conviction before the Bombay High Court. The case arose from a trap laid by the CBI where the appellant, a public servant, allegedly demanded and accepted a bribe of Rs. 500 from the complainant to issue a no objection certificate. The prosecution examined witnesses including the complainant and panch witnesses. The trial court convicted the appellant based on the recovery of tainted money and the evidence of the complainant. On appeal, the High Court examined the evidence and found that the prosecution failed to prove the demand and acceptance of bribe beyond reasonable doubt. The complainant's testimony was inconsistent and not corroborated by independent witnesses. The panch witness turned hostile. The High Court held that mere recovery of tainted money is not sufficient to convict under Section 7 of the PC Act. The presumption under Section 20 of the Act arises only after demand is proved. Since the demand was not established, the conviction was set aside and the appellant was acquitted.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Corruption - Demand and Acceptance of Bribe - Section 7, Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 - The prosecution must prove demand and acceptance of bribe beyond reasonable doubt; mere recovery of tainted money is insufficient to sustain conviction - Held that the trial court erred in convicting the appellant without establishing the demand and acceptance (Paras 1-10).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 is sustainable when the prosecution failed to prove the demand and acceptance of bribe beyond reasonable doubt.
Final Decision
Appeal allowed. Conviction and sentence set aside. Appellant acquitted of the offence under Section 7 of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
Law Points
- Demand and acceptance of bribe must be proved beyond reasonable doubt
- Presumption under Section 20 of PC Act arises only after demand is proved
- Mere recovery of tainted money is not sufficient to convict under Section 7 of PC Act
