The state of maharashtra vs. ananda vedu pagar

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. ANANDA VEDU PAGAR

https://www.the-laws.com/Encyclopedia/Browse/Case?CaseId=315102771100

Download from HC website.

thank you. but it does not serve my purpose. It is not the full judgment.

Obtain certified copy from HC.

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. ANANDA VEDU PAGAR

LAWS(BOM)-2015-6-63

HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY

Decided on June 12,2015

 

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Appellant

VERSUS

Ananda Vedu Pagar Respondents

JUDGEMENT

S.B. Shukre, J. - (1.) THIS is an appeal preferred by the State against the judgment and order dated 20/8/1999 delivered by Special Judge, Nashik, thereby acquitting the respondent of the offence punishable under Section 161 of the Indian Penal Code and also for the offence punishable under Section 5(2) read with Section 5(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947. Briefly stated, facts of the case are as under.: "The complainant in this case is one Rajaram Shinde against whom and whose family members a complaint had been filed on 31/7/1987 by one Sulochana Shinde with police station, Pimpalgaon Baswant. The complainant, Sulochana Shinde, had made some allegation against the wife of Rajaram Shinde and also Rajaram and his relatives in respect of a quarrel that had taken place on 31/7/1987 in between Sulochana on the one hand and wife of Rajaram and her relatives on the other hand. Rajaram and other members of his family including his wife against whom complaint was lodged by Sulochana were summoned to police station Pimpalgaon Baswant on 05/8/1987. At that time, respondent was attached to said police station as Police Head Constable and it was he who had summoned the said persons. In response to the summons, Rajaram and some other male members of his family visited police station, Pimpalgaon Baswant and met the respondent. On seeing only male members attending the police station, the respondent got annoyed and asked Rajaram as to why the female members did not come to the police station. Respondent threatened Rajaram and other persons accompanying him to detain them in the police station till the female family members came to the police station. Rajaram got frightened and pleaded with respondent not to resort to any coercive measure. Respondent then made a demand of bribe of Rs. 200/ - from Rajaram for not arresting him and also not taking any further action in the matter. The amount being on the higher side, Rajaram requested the respondent to reduce the amount. Respondent agreed to take Rs. 100/ - as bribe for doing official work from Rajaram and also agreed to accept this amount on 07/8/1987. Rajaram assured the respondent to fulfill his demand on 07/8/1987 and thereafter he and others, who were accompanying him, returned to the village. On 07/8/1987, in the morning, Rajaram Shinde went to the office of Anti Corruption Bureau at Nashik as he was not willing to pay the bribe amount to the respondent and lodged a complaint against the respondent at the said office. It was decided to lay a trap for the respondent and catch him red handed while accepting the bribe amount. Therefore, services of two independent panchas were requisitioned and on their arrival, the complainant and both the panchas were explained the procedure that was followed in laying of the trap. They were also explained about the role of anthracene powder in making a trap successful. A demonstration regarding working of anthracene powder was given to the complainant Rajaram and panch witnesses. Complainant had produced one currency note of Rs. 50/ - denomination, two currency notes of Rs. 20/ - each and one currency note of Rs. 10/ -denomination. Anthracene powder was sprinkled on the currency notes and they were handed over to the complainant to be kept by him in left side pocket of his shirt. The complainant was told to give those currency notes only upon demand being made by the respondent. The shadow witness, Bhaskar, was instructed to accompany the complainant all the time and witness the transaction that would be taking place between the complainant and the respondent. The complainant was also told the manner in which signal was to be given. Second panch witness was asked to remain with the members of the trap party. As decided, the raiding party reached Pimpalgaon -Baswant and alighted from the vehicle at some distance before police station, Pimpalgaon -Baswant. While complainant and shadow panch witness together went to police station, Pimpalgaon -Baswant, the second panch witness and other members of the raiding party concealed themselves in an ambush. On arrival at the police station, the complainant and shadow panch saw the respondent as standing in the varandah of the police station. The respondent took them to a nearby Datta Mandir, where he recorded statements of the complainant and some other persons. After completion of recording of statements, the complainant asked the respondent to join him for a cup of tea. The respondent agreed and he along with the complainant and panch witness went to a nearby hotel. At the said hotel, "Nilkanth Hotel", all the three together had a cup of tea and after having finished with tea, the respondent inquired from the complainant as to whether or not his work was done. Complainant replied in the affirmative and thereafter, respondent demanded bribe amount of Rs. 100/ - from the complainant. Complainant took out the currency notes from his shirt pocket and handed them over to the respondent. Respondent accepted the currency notes and counted each of the currency notes by his hand and then he placed them in the pocket of his shirt. Complainant then gave pre -planned signal to the members of the raiding party on which they arrived at the hotel and caught hold of the respondent and on being asked by them about the tainted currency notes, respondent removed them from the pocket of his shirt and handed them over to the investigating officer. Fingers of the respondent and complainant as well as shirt pockets of both of them were tested in ultraviolet light whereupon blue glow appeared on the fingers, currency notes as well inner portions of the shirt pockets. It was, therefore, confirmed that the tainted currency notes smeared with anthracene power had been given by the complainant and accepted by the respondent. The currency notes and the shirt were seized in presence of the panchas. A detailed panchanama was recorded and a formal complaint was filed against the respondent. Statement of witnesses were recorded and after completion of investigation, a charge -sheet was filed against the respondent. A charge for an offence punishable under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act equivalent to Section 161 of the Indian Penal Code and also for an offence under Section 13(i)(d) punishable under Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 equivalent to Section 5(2) read with Section 5(i)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 was framed against the respondent. As the respondent pleaded not guilty to the same, he was tried for the said offences, in accordance with law. On merits of the case, learned Special Judge found that the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt the offences with which the respondent was charged and, therefore, acquitted the respondent of the same. The State has preferred the present appeal against acquittal of the respondent."
(2.) I have heard learned A.P.P. for the appellant -State and learned Counsel for the respondent. I have carefully gone through the impugned judgment and order and also record of the case. According to learned A.P.P., there is sufficient evidence available on record to nail the appellant for the offences with which he has been charged in this case. She submits that appreciation of evidence by the trial Court is perverse. The evidence of P.W. -3 Khazasan Gaffur, the sanctioning authority in the matter, sufficiently shows that he had applied his mind and properly arrived at the conclusion about sufficiency of the material for proceeding further in the matter against the respondent and that there is also a corroboration to the evidence of the complainant, P.W. -2 Rajaram Shinde regarding demand and acceptance of bribe amount coming from the testimony of shadow panch witness, P.W. -1 Bhaskar. She also questions the finding of the trial Court that the prosecution has failed to establish that the amount of Rs. 100/ - that was accepted by the respondent, was for doing some official work and was received as a motive or reward for not arresting the complainant and the family members and for not proceeding further in the matter. She submits that the evidence of the prosecution, if carefully perused, would show that even these essential ingredients of the offences punishable under Sections 161 I.P.C. and Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 have been fulfilled in this case and, therefore, she further submits, the findings recorded by the trial Court need to be interfered with.
(3.) LEARNED Counsel for the respondent has submitted that in an appeal against acquittal, it is well settled law that finding of innocence of the accused recorded by the trial Court cannot be upset by the appellate Court just because two views are possible. He submits that unless it is shown that the view adopted by the trial Court is so illogical that it cannot be taken at all or that it is the result of non consideration of material evidence or consideration of some extraneous material, appellate Court cannot interfere with the findings recorded by the trial Court. He submits that such being not the case here, no fault with the impugned judgment and order could be found.For full Judgement you need to apply for certified copy from Highcourt.

Thanks for the replies. It is time consuming to get certified copies from the HC. That is why i have requested if someone has the full judgment readily.