Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Vikas Baburao Marathe, a Talathi (revenue officer), was convicted by the Special Judge, Jalgaon, for offences under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read with 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, and sentenced to three years' imprisonment. The complainant, Pandharinath Choudhary, a retired municipal clerk, sought deletion of encumbrances on his wife's land to facilitate its sale. Despite orders from the Tahsildar, the appellant allegedly delayed issuing a clean 7/12 extract and demanded a bribe of Rs. 500. A trap was laid, and the appellant was caught accepting the money. The High Court, on appeal, scrutinized the evidence and found material inconsistencies. The complainant's testimony regarding the demand and acceptance was not corroborated by the independent panch witness, and the recovery of money alone was insufficient to prove guilt. The court held that the prosecution failed to establish demand and acceptance beyond reasonable doubt, and the presumption under Section 20 of the Act could not be invoked. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, the conviction was set aside, and the appellant was acquitted.
Headnote
A) Prevention of Corruption Act - Demand and Acceptance of Bribe - Sections 7, 13(1)(d), 13(2) - Burden of Proof - The prosecution must prove demand and acceptance of bribe beyond reasonable doubt; presumption under Section 20 arises only after such proof. In this case, the evidence of the complainant and trap witnesses was inconsistent and lacked corroboration, leading to acquittal. (Paras 1-10) B) Evidence Law - Trap Witness - Credibility - Testimony of trap witnesses requires careful scrutiny and corroboration. The court found material contradictions and improvements in the testimony of the complainant and panch witness, rendering the prosecution case doubtful. (Paras 5-10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) r/w 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 is sustainable based on the evidence on record.
Final Decision
Appeal allowed. Conviction and sentence set aside. Appellant acquitted of all charges. Fine, if paid, to be refunded.
Law Points
- Presumption under Section 20 of Prevention of Corruption Act
- 1988 arises only after demand and acceptance are proved
- Standard of proof in corruption cases
- Necessity of corroboration to trap witness testimony
