Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Waman s/o Malhari Jambhulkar, was convicted by the Special Judge (Under Prevention of Corruption Act) and 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Nagpur in Special Criminal Case No.19 of 1990 under Sections 7 and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, and sentenced to simple imprisonment for six months and one year respectively, with fines. He appealed to the High Court. At the relevant time, the appellant was working as a Nazul Surveyor in the City Survey Office at Nagpur. The complainant (PW1) had submitted an application on 06.12.1989 for mutation of his father's house property and issuance of a property card. The appellant allegedly demanded Rs.500/- for issuing the property card, later reduced to Rs.100/-. The complainant approached the Anti Corruption Bureau, which laid a trap on 01.02.1990. The tainted money was recovered from the appellant's possession. The trial court convicted the appellant. The High Court examined the evidence and found that the complainant's testimony was unreliable and not corroborated by independent witnesses. The panch witness (PW2) turned hostile, and the investigating officer (PW4) admitted that the complainant had a prior dispute with the appellant. The court held that the prosecution failed to prove demand and acceptance beyond reasonable doubt. The appeal was allowed, the conviction and sentence were set aside, and the appellant was acquitted.
Headnote
A) Prevention of Corruption Act - Demand and Acceptance of Bribe - Sections 7, 13(2) Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 - The prosecution must prove demand and acceptance of bribe beyond reasonable doubt; mere recovery of tainted money is not sufficient to draw presumption under Section 20 of the Act when the complainant's testimony is unreliable and lacks corroboration. Held that the appeal is allowed and the appellant is acquitted (Paras 1-10).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Sections 7 and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 is sustainable on the basis of the evidence on record.
Final Decision
The appeal is allowed. The judgment and order dated 17.03.2003 passed by the Special Judge (Under Prevention of Corruption Act) and 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Nagpur in Special Criminal Case No.19 of 1990 is set aside. The appellant is acquitted of the charges under Sections 7 and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The bail bonds stand discharged.
Law Points
- Demand and acceptance of bribe must be proved beyond reasonable doubt
- Complainant's testimony must be corroborated in trap cases
- Mere recovery of tainted money is insufficient for conviction under Section 7 and 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act
- 1988
