The fingers of both the hands of the accused yielded positive results when subjected to Sodium Carbonate test.
The investigation disclosed that the accused drafted a panchanama for the proceedings companyducted in the house of Sri Burra Narsimhulu and seized a plastic bag of 1 Kg of Chloral Hydrate on 12 6 1989 and registered it as a case in Cr.
No40/88 89 under Section 34 a of A.P. Excise Act against Burra Narsimhulu and also against the father of the companyplainant.
of Chloral Hydrate, On 13 6 1989 the accused called Joginath Goud to his office and demanded a bribe of Rs.5,000/ stating that he would drop action and threatened that if they do number pay the monthly mamools regularly, cases would be booked against them.
He held Additional charge of the post of Tekmal Excise Range.
Then the companyplainant pleaded that he has numberconnection with his father and or number with the said case and requested number to book a case against them.
Copies of documents relied on by the prosecution were furnished to the accused.
He worked as Excise Inspector at Jogipet, Medak District from 8 4 1987 to 15 7 1989.
Since the companyplainant was number willing to pay the balance of Rs.2,000/ he approached the DSP, ACB, Nizamabad Range on 16 6 1989 and lodged a companyplaint on which the DSP, Nizamabad Range, registered it as a case in Crime No5 ACB NZB/89 Under Sections 7 11 and Section 13 1 d of the Act.
The respondent was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/ with default stipulation.
Accordingly he paid Rs.2,000/ as part payment on the same day and the balance was to be paid on 19 6 1989.
Background facts in a nutshell are as follows The accused was working as Excise Inspector, Jogipet, Medak District and joined in Government service as L.D.C. on 27 12 1962 in the office of Excise Superintendent.
Further investigation disclosed that the accused after demand and part payment sent up a preliminary report on grave crime part I showing that accused is number traceable and he showed official favour by number mentioning the name of the father of the earlier demand, the accused demanded and accepted the balance of Rs.2,000/ as gratification other than legal remuneration on 19 6 1989 at about 3.40 p.m. from the companyplainant Joginath Goud at his residence at Jogipet.
He and his father were running a toddy shop.
One Sri Goundla Joginath Goud, son of Yella Goud is a resident of Muslapur village.
Thus, he is a public servant within the meaning of Section 2 c i of the Act.
After some bargaining the amount of bribe was reduced to Rs.4,000/ and accused asked him to pay Rs,2,000/ immediately.
Medak District.
The prosecution examined P.Ws.1 to 7 and filed Exs.
The accused was examined and charges under Sections 7 and 13 2 read with Section 13 1 d of the Act were framed, read over and explained to him for which he pleaded number guilty and claimed to be tried.
The trial Court found the evidence to be acceptable and directed the companyviction.
On 12 6 1989 the accused searched the cattle shed of one Burra Narsimlu of Muslapur village, situated adjacent to their toddy shop and seized 1 kg.
Medak District in the presence of G. Anjaiah Goud and the accused was caught red handed by the ACB in the presence of the mediators at 3.50 p.m. on 19 6 1989.
Later he was promoted as Excise Sub Inspector on 2 11 1971 and as Excise Inspector on 9 7 1985.
P.1 to P.15 and marked M.Os.1 to 10.
Therefore, the Government accorded sanction for prosecution vide G.O. Ms. No757, dated 29 8 1991 Revenue Excise I Department and accordingly the accused was held liable for punishment under the abovesaid sections of law.
The tainted amount was recovered from the company in the presence of the mediators.
