VIGILANCE MANUAL VOLUME III - AP Online

750 DECISION - 375
1994 Cri.L.J. BOM 475
This appeal by the State is directed against the finding of
acquittal by the Special Judge for the offence punishable under secs.
7, 13(1)(d) read with sec. 13(2) of the P.C. Act, 1988. The facts leading
to the prosecution are as follows:
Accused Nos. 1 and 2, Sub-Inspector and Constable, were
attached to the Wadi Police Station of City of Nagpur. On a complaint
of abuses and quarrel against P.W.1 Sangamlal and his wife, Accused
No.1 called them to the Police Station and demanded Rs. 1500 from
P.W.1 for dropping the proceedings, and with the intervention of
Accused No.2, the demand was settled at Rs. 1300. P.W. 1 lodged
a complaint with the Anti-Corruption Bureau on the same day (23-1-
1989) and a trap was arranged, but it was unsuccessful.
Next day (24-1-89) at about 8.30 AM, P.W.1 complainant
and panch P.W.3 went to Accused No.1 in Police Station and Accused
No.1 directed P.W.1 to go with Accused No.2. Accused No.2 took
the complainant to P.W.4 Suresh to exchange the notes. P.W.4 was
unable. As such they approached P.W.5 Arun Hadke and ultimately
the tainted currency notes in possession of the complainant reached
P.W. 6 Raman Wadekar. The raiding party headed by P.W.9, Sub-
Inspector Saraj reached the spot and seized the tainted currency
notes from P.W. 6 in the petrol pump, which is at a distance of 2 kilo
meters away from the Police Station. P.W. 7 Tijare who is neighbour
of P.W.1, was throughout in the company of P.W.1. The defence of
the accused, A.1 and A.2 was one of denial and they attributed motive.
The special judge acquitted both the accused.
On facts, the High Court (a Division Bench) found
corroboration of the evidence of P.W.1 as to the demand of bribe by
Accused No. 1 at 9.30 a.m. on 23-1-89, by P.W. 7 and other
circumstances. High Court examined the evidence on the demand
and acceptance on 24-1-89. As per the evidence of the complainant,
Accused No.2 took him to a wine shop on a Luna and P.W.3, Panch