Case Note & Summary
The State of Gujarat filed an appeal under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the judgment and order of acquittal dated 31.05.2008 passed by the learned Special Judge, 2nd Fast Track Court, Amreli in Special Case No. 93/1999. The respondent (original accused) was a Helper (Class III) in the GEB Amreli Rural Sub-Division at Lunidhar and was charged for offences punishable under Sections 7, 13(1)(d) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The case of the prosecution was that the complainant Babubhai Lakshmanbhai @ Lakubhai Hirpara wanted to construct a second floor on his father's house and had applied to the Deputy Engineer, GEB Amreli on 18.04.1999 regarding shifting of an electric wire passing over the house. About eight days prior to 11.05.1999, the accused came to the complainant's house and demanded Rs. 4000/- as illegal gratification for shifting the wire, which was later settled at Rs. 3000/-. On 10.05.1999, the accused met the complainant at Amreli market and told him to come to his house the next day at 11.00 am with the money. The complainant lodged a complaint with the ACB, and a trap was laid on 11.05.1999. The trap resulted in the recovery of Rs. 3000/- from the accused. The trial court acquitted the accused on the ground that the prosecution failed to prove the demand and acceptance of bribe beyond reasonable doubt. The High Court, after re-appreciating the evidence, held that the findings of the trial court were not perverse and that the appeal against acquittal deserved to be dismissed. The court noted that the complainant (PW-1) was not a reliable witness as his testimony was full of contradictions and improvements. The independent panch witness (PW-2) turned hostile and did not support the prosecution case. The other panch witness (PW-3) was a police witness and his testimony was not trustworthy. The court also observed that the prosecution failed to prove the demand of bribe by the accused. The recovery of money alone, without proof of demand and acceptance, is not sufficient to convict the accused under the PC Act. The court further held that the presumption under Section 20 of the PC Act does not arise automatically and the prosecution must first prove the foundational facts. Accordingly, the appeal was dismissed and the acquittal was upheld.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Appeal against Acquittal - Section 378 CrPC - Standard of Review - The High Court in an appeal against acquittal will not interfere unless the findings of the trial court are perverse or based on no evidence. The appellate court must give due weight to the opinion of the trial court which had the advantage of seeing the witnesses depose. (Paras 1-31) B) Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 - Sections 7, 13(1)(d) and 13(2) - Demand and Acceptance of Bribe - The prosecution must prove demand and acceptance of illegal gratification beyond reasonable doubt. The presumption under Section 20 of the PC Act arises only after the prosecution proves that the accused accepted or obtained the gratification. In the present case, the trap witness (complainant) was not reliable and the independent panch witness turned hostile, leading to failure of proof. (Paras 2-31) C) Evidence Act, 1872 - Section 134 - Number of Witnesses - The law does not require any particular number of witnesses to prove a fact. However, the testimony of a single witness must be credible and trustworthy. In this case, the sole trap witness (complainant) was found to be unreliable due to contradictions and improvements. (Paras 20-31)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the judgment of acquittal passed by the learned Special Judge is perverse and requires interference by this Court.
Final Decision
The appeal is dismissed. The judgment and order of acquittal dated 31.05.2008 passed by the learned Special Judge, 2nd Fast Track Court, Amreli in Special Case No. 93/1999 is confirmed. Bail bonds, if any, stand cancelled.
Law Points
- Appeal against acquittal
- Section 378 CrPC
- presumption under Section 20 PC Act
- demand and acceptance of bribe
- credibility of trap witness
- independent panch witness
- standard of proof in criminal appeal against acquittal
