1 HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR . Criminal Application No.94 of 2010 In Criminal Appeal /2010 State of Maharashtra VS. Shridhar Marotrao Meshram ______________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Mr. S.S. Doifode, A.P.P. for appellant, Mr. P.P. Kotwal, Advocate for respondent. Coram : A.H. JOSHI, J. Date : 25th March, 2010. 1. Heard both sides. 2. The learned A.P.P. places reliance on paragraph 10 of the Judgment, which reads as follows; “10) In the teeth the following admitted facts, the scrutiny of evidence is traveling in a very narrow compass : a) The accused was working as a Land Surveyor. b) That the complainant wanted to get his land measured and he was in need of Akhiv Patrak for the same. c) That certain fees was payable for getting his land measured. d) That the accused was empowered to process such application, and accept fees. e) That the accused had taken 2 the money for Rs.500/- from the complainant on the date of trap. f) That the hands of accused were tested, changed the colour to the sodium carbonate solution. g) That the tainted currency notes were recovered from the custody of accused. 3. The learned A.P.P. states that the contents of paragraph 10 disclose admitted fact for acceptance of amount by the accused, therefore, it was the duty of the accused to prove that the money so accepted was not received on account of bribe, but on account of the fee officially chargeable. 4. The learned Judge has observed in paragraph 10 of the Judgment the nature of burden on the accused, which is always lesser than one on the prosecution. 5. The respondent has suggested in the defence that as the acceptance of money was towards the fees for measurement, which was also Rs.500/-(Rupees Five Hundred Only), the prosecution story came under shadow of doubt. 6. This Court concurs with reasons adopted by learned Special Judge. 7. In the result, the appeal against acquittal is of no merit and the same is dismissed. Judge |adgokar| 3