1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR Criminal Application No. 161 of 2010 IN Criminal Appeal No. of 2010 [State of Mah. Vs. Changdeo S. Sanap] 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, APP for the appellant. Mr. V.M. Deshpande, Adv., for respondent. ----- CORAM : A.H. JOSHI, J. DATE : 20th April, 2010. 1. This is an appeal against acquittal. 2. Heard. 3. The learned Special Judge ordered acquittal on the grounds, namely:- [a] That all three facts, namely [1] demand of bribe amount, [2] acceptance, and [3] recovery thereof from the person of accused, which were required to be proved, were not proved. [b] Alleged purpose for which illegal gratification was sought was to avoid execution of arrest warrant. However, it had come on record that the 2 day on which the bribe was allegedly accepted, the warrant was already returned unserved. 4. Acceptance of illegal gratification or performance of a legal duty is the backbone of the charge. 5. When it is proved that no duty was to be performed by the accused, the very charge fails. 6. Even on what is proved by the prosecution, it is evident that the accused did not demand the bribe, but initially refused to accept it also. 7. In this background, demand, acceptance and recovery all three are not proved. 8. In these premises, the Judgment and order of acquittal cannot be faulted. 9. No indulgence is called for. 10. Appeal is, therefore, dismissed. Judge |Hedau| 3