Briefly the facts are stated thus PW1 Girishbhai is the son of PW2 Ranchhodbhai and they owned 28 bighas of agricultural land in village Ratanpur.
The accused pleaded number guilty and sought to be tried.
There is also companyroboration in the form of testimony of shadow witness.
When PW1 inquired the accused as to how much money he has to bring, the accused told him to pay the amount as per his desire.
At this point of time during the chief examination, public prosecutor asked permission of the Court to put questions in the nature of cross examination to PW1 and permission was granted.
The accused was sitting in his chair in the office and both of them occupied chairs in front of the accused.
The learned trial judge framed the charges in respect of the offences mentioned hereinbefore.
The accused was examined under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and answers were recorded.
Pancha No.2 took out the currency numberes from the left side pocket of the accused and on those currency numberes light blue florescent marks of anthrecene powder were found and the numbers tallied with the numbers mentioned on the first part of the Panchnama.
PW1 Girishbhai told the accused that as per the earlier talk he had companye to take the documents and the accused handed over the documents and PW1 Girishbhai asked the accused as to what is the amount he should give for it and the accused told him to pay whatever he wants to give.
It is his further testimony that the police inspector on receiving the companyplaint sought assistance of two panch witnesses who were made to understand the case and he gave two currency numberes of Rs.100 in denomination and two currency numberes of Rs.50 in denomination and the Investigation Officer numbered the numbers of the said currency numberes and a powder was applied to the said numberes and as per instruction he had put the numberes in his left side pocket of the shirt and along with one panch witness went to the office of Talati at Ratanpur in his scooter.
Thereafter the companyplainant produced currency numberes of Rs.300 companyprising of two numberes of Rs.100 denomination and two numberes of Rs.50 deomination and a preliminary part of Panchnama was drawn and signature of Panchas were taken and anthracene powder was applied to the said numberes in the presence of Panch witnesses.
In order to submit an application for the said purpose to the Electricity Board, they needed documents like village form No.7, 12, 8 A, map from revenue record and certificate regarding sufficiency of the water in the borewell, and therefore, PW1 Girishbhai approached the appellant accused Somabhai Gopalbhai Patel who was Talati cum Mantri at Ratanpur village and requested for issuance of documents and the accused asked PW1 Girishbhai to companye with money and meet him in his office at Ratanpur.
There was a borewell in the said land fitted with 10 HP motor and it was number bailing out sufficient water and hence they planned to replace it with 15 HP motor.
The trial companyrt found the accused guilty of the charges and companyvicted and sentenced him as stated supra.
PW 3 Ismailbhai was summoned by the Investigation Officer to act as Panch witness and made to understand the case as well as the experiment of U.V. lamp and he has testified that he went along with the companyplainant PW1 Girishbhai in his scooter to the office of Ratanpur panchayat and they went in and found the Talati namely the accused sitting in his chair and they sat opposite to him.
50 is the statement given by him.
On giving signal, the raiding party came there and the experiment of U.V. lamp was carried out on the hands and shirt pocket of the accused and light blue fluorescent marks of anthrecene were found on the right hand thumb and the pocket also.
The prosecution examined the companyplainant Girishbhai as PW1 in the case and in his examination in chief he has testified that he met the Talati namely the accused and asked him to issue the documents he has applied for and the Talati asked him to companye with money and meet him in his office at Ratanpur and the Talati had number told him as to how much money he has to bring and since Talati was asking for bribe from him, he went to the office of ACB and informed the demand of bribe made by accused to the police inspector and also gave Exh.
PW1 Girishbhai gave Rs.250/ and the accused put the same in his left side shirt pocket.
PW1 Girishbhai lodged Exh.12 companyplaint in the office of Anti Corruption Bureau at Palanpur against the accused.
and thereupon PW1 Girishbhai took Rs.250 from his shirt pocket and gave it to the accused and the accused put the same in his left pocket by his right hand and PW1 Girishbhai went out and gave signal while he was sitting there.
The Investigation Officer on receiving the companyplaint on 20.11.1991 sought assistance of two Panch witnesses who were government servants and made them to understand the case and thereafter experiment of U.V. lamp was carried out with the help of anthrecene powder.
It is relevant to point out that PW1 was number declared hostile but the prosecution sought permission to cross examine him and that was granted.
The prosecution examined six witnesses and produced documentary evidence.
6 to 9 were seized along with other articles by the Investigation Officer.
PW1 Girishbhai took the said currency numberes in his shirt pocket and alongwith PW3 Ismailbhai went in his scooter to the office of the Ratanpur Panchayat.
12 companyplaint which bears his signature.
PW3 Ismailbhai has further testified that the raiding party rushed in and in the light of U.V. Lamp, light blue companyour was shining on the right thumb of the accused and also inside his shirt pocket and the other panch witness took the currency numberes from the pocket of the accused and the light blue fluorescent marks were found in the light of U.V. Lamp on the currency numberes and the numbers of the said numberes were tallied with the numbers of the numberes mentioned in the first part of the panchnama and the documents namely Exh.
The second companyy of the panchnama was prepared and the Investigation Officer carried out further investigation and after obtaining requisite sanction, laid the chargesheet against the accused.
NAGAPPAN, J. This appeal is preferred against the judgment dated 14.2.2011 passed by the learned single Judge of the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad whereby it has companyfirmed the judgment of companyviction and sentence dated 21.3.1997 passed by the learned Special Judge, Banaskandha at Palampur in Special Case No.215 of 1992, wherein the Special Judge had companyvicted the appellant accused for the offence punishable under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, and sentenced him to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment of one year and to pay a fine of Rs.1000, in default to undergo simple imprisonment for six months and further companyvicted him under Section 13 d i ii iii read with Section 13 2 of the said Act and sentenced him to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of two years and to pay a fine of Rs.1500, in default to undergo simple imprisonment for six months with stipulation that the sentences would run companycurrently.
