1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.968 OF 2009 State of Maharashtra ..APPLICANT VERSUS Ravindra Tilakchand Sonawane ..RESPONDENT Mr N.R. Shaikh, Advocate for the applicant; Mr Joydeep Chatterji, advocate for the respondent. CORAM : P.V. HARDAS, J. DATE : 28th September, 2010 PER COURT : This is an application filed by the applicant - State seeking leave to file appeal against the judgment of the Special Judge/Ad hoc District Judge-1 and Additioinal Sessions Judge, Jalgaon, who by judgment dated 13.11.2008 in Special Case (AC) No.7 of 2004, acquitted the respondent of offence punishable under section 7, 13 (1) (d) read with sec. 13 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. 2. With the assistance of the learned Counsel for the parties I have perused the findings recorded by the Trial Court. The Trial Court, it appears, had come to the conclusion that the accused had probablized his defence that he had demanded the money and had accepted an amount of Rs.1,000/- towards the repayment of Rs.1,000/- which was 2 owed by the complainant to him. At paragraph 21 of the deposition of P.W.1 complainant, the complainant has admitted that an amount of Rs. 1,000/- was owed by him to the accused towards the transfer of the telephone. At paragraph 23 of his deposition he has admitted that the accused had demanded the amount of Rs.1,000/- and he had mistaken the said demand to be illegal gratification, which was demanded by the accused and had accordingly lodged a complaint with the Anti Corruption Bureau. 3. In the light of the fact that the complainant has admitted in his cross-examination that he owed an amount of Rs.1,000/- and the fact that he had mistaken the demand of the respondent/accused as a demand for payment of the illegal gratification, the defence of the accused stood probablized. The Trial Court has held that the accused has been successful in probablizing his defence. 4. In the light of that, according to me, there is no merit in the present application seeking grant of leave and, therefore, this application is dismissed. Leave refused. ( P.V.HARDAS, J.) amj/criap968.09