1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD. CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1147 OF 2009 The State of Maharashtra Through DYSP Jalgaon. Applicant. V E R S U S Shivaji Shankar Beldar and another. Respondents. Smt. Reddy, Learned APP for State Applicant. CORAM : V .R. KINGAONKAR, J. DATE : 7TH AUGUST, 2009. PER COURT :- 1. Heard. 2- The respondents were prosecuted for offence under section 7, 13 (1) (d) r. w Section 13 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. The case of the prosecution is that the complainant Dashrath Patil was looking after the agricultural affairs of land owned by his relative by name Yuvraj Patil who is a medical practitioner and resides at Badlapur, Tq. Ambarnath Dist Thane. An amount of compensation of Rs.25,700/- was to be received by the complainant on behalf of said Yuvraj Patil as per notice issued by the Special Land Acquisition officer. The respondent No.1 was attached to Land Acquisition Office in the Collectorate, Jalgaon as Awal Karkoon (Senior Clerk). The complainant approached him on 2-3 occasions but lastly the respondent No.1 2 assured him to do the work on submission of the documents ‘Power of Attorney and the application.’ He complied with such direction but was again asked to visit office on 08.09.2003. On that day, the respondent No.1 demanded illegal gratification of Rs.3,000/- for issuance of the cheque towards compensation amount. However, on pleadings with the respondent No.1 about excessiveness of the amount, the demand was slashed down to Rs.2,000/-. It was alleged that the amount was to be paid on 10.09.2003. The complainant, therefore approached the D.Y.S.P of A.C.B, Jalgaon. His report was reduced into writing. The DYSP (ACB) called for two panchas and arranged a trap. According to the prosecution, as per the instructions of the respondent No.1 tainted currency notes of Rs.2,000/- were accepted by the respondent No.2 in the office of the Collector. The currency notes smeared anthracene powder were recovered from right hand side pocket of Payjama of the respondent No.2 under a panchanama. He could not explain why he accepted the amount and how was he found in possession of the tainted currency notes. 3- The learned Sessions Judge appears to have considered certain discrepancies in the version of the prosecution witnesses. The learned Sessions Judge noticed that work was already done when the amount was accepted and therefore the cause for payment was no more available. 4- The relevant facts are required to be considered in view of the deposition of the witnesses in as much as the prosecution came out with a case that the amount was demanded for completing the work of issuance of cheque towards compensation. The complainant asserted that, on 3-4 occasions he was not entertained by the respondent No.1. It is probable that 3 the respondent No.1 want to extract the amount of bribe money for doing work and as such had put off the request of the complainant from time to time. The learned Sessions Judge discarded the version of the independent panch witness because he had read the panchnama in the Court. It is primafacie explicit that memory of the witness was being refreshed and therefore such observations of the Learned Sessions Judge may not be seen to dislodge the version of the independent panch. In this view of the matter, leave to appeal is granted. 5- Admit. 6- Action u/s 390 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 7- Stand over to 6 th October, 2009. ( V. R. KINGAONKAR , J. ) ..... aaa/1147.09.odt