1. The present appeal, under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, is directed against the judgment and order of acquittal dated 31.12.1998 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 2nd Court, Bharuch, in Special Corruption Case No.6 of 1993, whereby the accused has been acquitted from the charges leveled against him.
2. As per the case of the prosecution, the respondent – accused being pubic servant, was serving as Labour Officer in the year 1992 at Vagra. As per the case of the prosecution, on 14.9.1992, the complainant had gone to Vagra village for his personal work and there he came to now that his father was also called to attend the office of Labour Officer on 21.9.1992. Later on, it was fixed that in place of father, the complainant may remain present with statement and pay Rs.20/. It is alleged that the complainant may collect Rs.20/ if other farmers of village do not produce the statement. Therefore, complainant would pay Rs.100/ to the accused as amount of five persons. After 2/3 days, a notice was received by the complainant, stating that the father of the complainant to remain present at the office of Labour Court, Vagra on 21.9.1992 at 11:00 a.m. Such similar notice was issued to other farmers of the village. The complainant mentioned names of 4 farmers in his complaint and all were called on 21.9.1992 at 11:00 a.m. with statement. Therefore, complaint was lodged before ACB office. Therefore, the complaint for the offences punishable under Sections 7 and 13 of the Prevention of Corruption Act against the accused.
3. To prove the case against the present accused, the prosecution has produced several documentary evidence and examined witnesses like P.W.1 Takhatsinhy Govindbhai Gohil at Exhibit 5, P.W.2 Rambhai Mansangbhai Vasav at Exhibit 11, P.W 3 Rajendra Jentilal Shelat at Exhibit 13, P.W 4 Thakorbhai Kanjibhai at Exhibit 15, P.W.5 Jesangbhai Nathabhai at Exhibit 16, P.W.6 Bharatbhai Kanjibhai at Exhibit 17, P.W.7 Laxmansinh Chhabildas Barot at Exhibit 20.
4. At the end of trial, after recording the statements of the accused under section 313 of Cr.P.C., and hearing arguments on behalf of prosecution and the defence, the learned Special Judge and Additional Sessions Judge, Palanpur, acquitted the respondent of all the charges leveled against him by aforesaid judgment and order.
5. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the aforesaid judgment and order passed by the lower Court, the appellant State has preferred the present appeal.
6. It is submitted by learned APP that the judgment and order of the Sessions Court is against the provisions of law; the Sessions Court has not properly considered the evidence led by the prosecution and looking to the provisions of law itself it is established that the prosecution has proved the whole ingredients of the evidence against the present respondents. Learned APP has also taken this court through the oral as well as the entire documentary evidence. He submitted that the case of the prosecution was supported by the Investigating Officer at Exhibit 20 and thereby the offence was proved against the accused. He submitted that the Appeal is required to be allowed by quashing and setting aside the judgment and order passed by the lower Court. He submitted that during the course of experiment of ultraviolet lamp, the marks of anthracene powder were found on the hand of the accused. He further submitted that the accused demanded amount of bribe other than legal remuneration. He also submitted that though the complainant turned hostile, it cannot said that the accused had not committed offence under the Act. Therefore, he submitted that the lower Court has failed appreciate the documents like complaint, panchnama and the witnesses examined during the trial and therefore, the judgment and order of acquittal is required to be dismissed by allowing the Appeal.
7. Learned advocate Mr. Shakeel Qureshi for the respondent, accused submitted that the lower Court has rightly passed the judgment and order of acquittal by appreciating the evidence in true manner and therefore, no interference is required to be called for, from this Court. Therefore, he prayed to dismiss the Appeal.
8. I have gone through the judgment and order passed by the trial court. I have also perused the oral as well as documentary evidence led before the trial court and also considered the submissions made by learned APP for the appellantState. First of all, the complainant himself has been declared hostile and therefore, it can be said that the prosecution has not proved the case against the accused for alleged offence under the Prevention of Corruption Act. The material three aspects (1) demand (2) acceptance and (3) recovery are required to be proved against the accused. Here in this case, the first aspect of demand on the part of the accused for illegal gratification is not proved and the witnesses examined before the lower Court have not supported the version of the prosecution that the accused demand money other than legal renumeration. Therefore, in absence of demand on the part of the accused, it cannot be said that the accused committed such offence under the Act. Even from the facts of the case, it transpires that the notice in question, was not only issued to the complainant but it was issued to some other farmers and only the complainant met the accused in connection of the notice. The story narrated by the complainant is not believable so far as the alleged demand on the part of the accused is concerned. Therefore, lower Court has rightly appreciated the evidence and rightly acquitted the accused.
9. It is also a settled legal position that in acquittal appeal, the appellate court is not required to rewrite the judgment or to give fresh reasonings, when the reasons assigned by the Court below are found to be just and proper.
10. In the above view of the matter, I am of the considered opinion that the trial court was completely justified in acquitting the respondent of the charges leveled against her.
11. I find that the findings recorded by the trial court are absolutely just and proper and in recording the said findings, no illegality or infirmity has been committed by it.
12. I am, therefore, in complete agreement with the findings, ultimate conclusion and the resultant order of acquittal recorded by the court below and hence find no reasons to interfere with the same. Hence the appeal is hereby dismissed. Bail bond, if any, stands cancelled. Record and proceedings to be sent back to trial Court, forthwith.
(Z.K. SAIYED, J.) ynvyas