- (1.)THE present appellant has preferred this appeal under sec. 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 15.1.1999 passed by the learned Special Judge & Additional Sessions Judge, Kheda at Nadiad in Special Case (ACB) No. 2/1995, whereby, the learned Special Judge has convicted the appellant under sec. 7 of Prevention of Corruption Act and sentenced to undergo R/I for the period of six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/ -, in default, to undergo further S/I for two weeks. The appellant is also convicted under sec. 13(1)9d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and sentenced to undergo R/I for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/ -, in default, to undergo further S/I for two weeks, which is impugned in this appeal.
(2.)THE brief facts of the prosecution case is as under:
2.1 It is the case of the prosecution that PW - 1, the complainant Ex. 11, was serving with M/s Gayatri Printing Press, Mahemdavad, having small salary. Therefore, he intended to start a side business. IN order to start a side business, he approached Mr. R.D. Sharma, who was working with the Village Development Welfare Centre, at Mahemdavad, for obtaining loan from the Bank. During the talk with Mr. R.D. Sharma, the complainant came to know that he is entitled to have loan of Rs. 60,000/ -. Therefore, the complainant thought to have loan of Rs. 10,000/ - and to start business of spare parts of scooter, and accordingly, under the instructions of Mr. R.D. Sharma, the complainant filled in the form of loan and enclosed the zerox copies of the ration card, school leaving certificate and the copies of the testimonials. It is also the case of the prosecution that the application Form along with the enclosures including a certificate the certificate of his income were handed over to the present accused under the instructions of Mr. R.D. Sharma, on or about 13th July, 1994, at the office of Taluka Panchayat, Mahemdavad, where the accused was discharging his duties. It is further case of the prosecution that the accused while accepting the application from the complainant, informed him that the amount of rs. 300/ - is required to be paid if loan amount of rs. 10,000/ - is required to be sanctioned, otherwise, loan papers will not be forwarded and the loan will not be sanctioned. The complainant asked the accused that he will return within 10 to 15 days, as he was not having sufficient funds on that day. Therefore, the complainant received message from Mr. Sharma, on 24th July, 1994, to see the accused. Therefore, in response to the message, the complainant had met the present on 1st August, 1994, at about 3.00 hours at Taluka Panchayat Office, at Mahemdabad. It is further the case of the prosecution that when the complainant met the accused on 1st August, 1994, the accused inquired about the amount of Rs. 300/ -. In response to the said inquiry, the complainant asked the accused that he could arrange only Rs. 100/ -, and therefore, the amount of Rs. 100/ - was demanded, and accepted by the accused. Two currency notes in denomination of Rs. 50/ - were parted with to the accused, which was placed by the accused in the drawer of his table. After parting with the amount of Rs. 100/ -, the accused was persuaded by the complainant for sanctioning the loan. The accused asked the complainant that if he (complainant) would pay the remaining amount of Rs.200/ -, papers will be forwarded for further action. The accused further asked the complainant to pay the amount of rs. 200/ - on Thursday on 4th August, 1994, up to 15.00 hours at Taluka Panchayat, Mahemdavad. Since the complainant was not willing to pay illegal gratification to the accused, and he was compelled to pay the amount of Rs. 100/ - by the accused to get his loan sanctioned and disbursed, he approached the office of the AntiCorruption Bureau, at Nadiad, and lodged his complaint Ex. 15 for laying the trap against the accused. It is also the case of the prosecution that PW -4 Suryakant Nathalal Bhatt, ex. 24, was discharging his duties as P.I. With the Office of the Police Station at Nadiad, received the complaint Ex. 15, reduced the complaint in writing, arranged for two independent panch witnesses. Upon arrival of the panch witnesses, the complaint Ex. 15 was made available to the panch witnesses, who read over it and the complainant produced 4 currency notes in denomination of Rs. 50/ - each in presence of panch witnesses which were smeared with the anthracene power and the demonstration of the ultra -violet was carried out in presence of the panch witnesses. The characteristics of the anthracene powder were explained and the experiment was conducted by the officials of the anti -corruption Bureau at Nadiad, on the said tainted currency notes in presence of the panch witnesses and the complainant. Thereafter, the tainted currency notes were placed in the left side of the open shirt and the necessary instructions were given to the panch no. 1 and the complainant. The first part of panchnama came to be drawn at the office of the Anti -corruption Bureau at Nadiad, and the complainant, panch no. 1 along with panch no. 2, Trapping Officer PW -4 along with the members of the raiding party proceeded in the Government vehicles to the office of Taluka Panchayat. It is also the case of the prosecution that the complainant and panch no. 1 started going towards the office of the Taluka Panchayat, Mehmedavad, who were followed by the Panch no. 2, PW -4 the Trapping Officer and the members of the raiding party. The complainant and panch no. 1 went to the office of the Taluka Panchayat, Mahemdavad at about 15.20 hours, and waited for the accused, as the accused was taking tea at Tea -stall. It is further the case of the prosecution that the complainant and panch no. 1 followed the accused. The accused came from the tea -stall, the complainant and the panch no. 1 followed the accused. The accused went to his table, picked up papers, and left the chair. The accused made gesture by fingers and accordingly, the complainant and the panch no. 1 followed the accused. The accused went towards the room. The accused stopped there. Meanwhile the panch no. 1 pretended to have water from the water -cooler. Meanwhile, the accused asked the complainant, 'what about my remaining amount ?' The complainant replied, I have brought that amount. Meanwhile, the accused inquired about the panch no. 1, the complainant informed the accused that he (panch no. 1) also intends to have a loan, and therefore, the accused asked the complainant to pay the amount as "give". In pursuance of the said demand, the complainant took up the currency notes smeared with the anthrecene powder from his right hand, and extended the same towards the accused, who accepted the said currency notes by his right hand and placed them into right side pocket of his gown (jhaba). After parting with the amount, the complainant asked the accused, whether the loan will be sanctioned which was replied by the accused "in affirmative", and the accused also assured him not to worry. Meanwhile, the accused changed the papers from his left hand to the right hand, and tried to go on up -stair. It is further the case of the prosecution that the complainant raised pre -arranged signal which invited the panch no. 2 PW -4 Suryakant Bhatt Ex. 24, the Trapping Officer and the members of the raiding party, the accused was apprehended at his office. It is further the case of the prosecution that personal search of the accused was conducted and he was fund in possession and control over the tainted currency notes of Rs. 200/ - in denomination of Rs. 50/ - each the numbers of which were found to be tallied with the first part of the panchnama. It is also the case of the prosecution that the hands of the accused as well as the complainant were examined under the rays of the ultra -violet lamp, upon which the flourescent of the anthracene powder was noticed on the right hand of the accused, the right hand of the complainant, inside and outside of the border of the pocket of gown borne by the accused. The flourescent of the anthracene powder was noticed on the hands of the panch no. 1, who recovered the tainted currency notes of Rs. 200/ - from the physical and conscious possession of the accused. It is also the case of the prosecution that the accused while discharging his duties as public servant was caught handed, while demanding and accepting the illegal gratification of Rs. 200/ - from the complainant. Thus, the seizure memo Ex. 20 came to be prepared and regular FIR came to be registered at the office of Anticorruption Bureau, at Nadiad and the case was registered by PW -4 Suryakant Bhatt, who recorded the statements of the relevant witnesses.

(3.)THE accused came to be charge -sheeted for the alleged offence punishable under section 7, 13(2) read with section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, which was numbered as Special Case (ACB) No. 2 of 1995.
The accused was charged vide at Ex. 7 The appellant accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.