Case Note & Summary
The State of Gujarat appealed against the acquittal of the respondent-accused, a Senior Clerk in the Taluka Panchayat Office, Bhuj, who was charged under Sections 7, 13(1)(d) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The complainant, a teacher, alleged that the accused demanded Rs.600 as illegal gratification for relieving him from service after transfer. The complainant paid Rs.100 initially and agreed to pay the remaining Rs.500 later. A trap was laid on 11.01.1993, and the accused was caught with anthracene-powdered currency notes. The trial court acquitted the accused on 05.04.2008, finding the prosecution evidence unreliable. The High Court, in appeal, examined the evidence and found that the panch witness turned hostile and did not support the prosecution. The complainant's testimony was inconsistent regarding the demand and acceptance of bribe. The court held that the demand of illegal gratification was not proved beyond reasonable doubt, and the acquittal was not perverse. The appeal was dismissed, and the acquittal was upheld.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Prevention of Corruption Act - Demand of Illegal Gratification - Sections 7, 13(1)(d), 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 - The prosecution failed to prove the demand of bribe beyond reasonable doubt as the panch witness turned hostile and the complainant's testimony was inconsistent and unreliable - Held that the acquittal was based on proper appreciation of evidence and not perverse (Paras 1-22).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the judgment of acquittal passed by the learned Trial Court is perverse and requires interference by the High Court under Section 378 of CrPC.
Final Decision
The appeal is dismissed and the judgment of acquittal passed by the learned Trial Court is confirmed.
Law Points
- Demand of illegal gratification must be proved beyond reasonable doubt
- Hostile witness testimony cannot be relied upon without corroboration
- Acquittal not to be reversed unless perverse
- Benefit of doubt to accused
