Gujarat High Court
The State Of Gujarat vs Chimanbhai Kabhai Vasava on 14 May, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/51/2007 ORDER DATED: 14/05/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 51 of 2007
==========================================================
THE STATE OF GUJARAT
Versus
CHIMANBHAI KABHAI VASAVA
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR SOAHAM JOSHI, APP for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR KUNAL S SHAH(5282) for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.N.RAY
Date : 14/05/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. Heard learned APP, Mr. Soaham Joshi for the Appellant - State of Gujarat and learned advocate Mr. Kunal S. Shah for the Respondent.
2. The State has filed the present Appeal under Section 378(1)(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code challenging inter alia the Judgment and Order dated 30.10.2006 passed by the Special Judge, Surat in Special Case No.10/1997, by which, the Ld. Trial Court had acquitted the respondent-accused under Sections 7, 13(1)
(d) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act holding inter alia that the prosecution had failed to prove the circumstances relied upon for the purpose of establishing Page 1 of 9 Uploaded by MAYA S. CHAUHAN(HC01402) on Wed May 21 2025 Downloaded on : Wed May 21 21:33:29 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/51/2007 ORDER DATED: 14/05/2025 undefined the guilt of the accused by any reliable or satisfactory evidence.
3. The brief facts leading to the filing of the present appeal are as under :-
3.1 An offence came to be registered with A.C.B. Police Station, Surat being C.R. No.2/1996 for the offences punishable under Sections 7, 13(1)(d) and 13(2) of the Prevention of the Corruption Act. The said complaint was registered by Hussain Ahmed Shaik resident of Near Rajivnagar Bhattha, Rader, Surat on 09.04.1996. 3.2 The complainant viz., Hussain Ahmad Shaikh, resident of Nr. Rajivnagar Bhattha, Rader, Surat in his complaint dated 09.04.1996 has informed that he is doing the business of imitation jewelery and as he was having some experience of fishing, he wanted to do business of fishing by keeping one small pond and, hence, in the forthcoming month, the complainant met Deputy Sarpanch of Jiav Village and on another day, he met Taluka-cum-Mantri and talked to him about the business of fishing on 29.03.1996. The Talati-cum-Mantri viz., Page 2 of 9 Uploaded by MAYA S. CHAUHAN(HC01402) on Wed May 21 2025 Downloaded on : Wed May 21 21:33:29 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/51/2007 ORDER DATED: 14/05/2025 undefined Chimanbhai (the respondent-accused) informed the complainant to come in the meeting of 29.03.1996 so that he will decide the rent with the panchayat member and finalize the matter. As the complainant could not go on that day, he went and gave application on 02.04.1996.
When he went to give the application, the Talati-cum- Mantri made the complainant sit and called two other members and Deputy Sarpanch and decided the rent of the pond for two years, but after the other persons left, the respondent-accused made a demand by saying that you will get a pond from June onwards and the respondent-accused also made demand of Rs.500/- towards bribe, out of which, the complainant gave one note of Rs.100/-, which the respondent-accused accepted. On 09.04.1996, when the complainant telephoned the respondent-accused on the number given by the respondent-accused, the respondent-accused asked the complainant to meet in the office at about 12 o'clock and also asked the complainant to bring Rs.400/- with him. Since the complainant was not willing to give money to the respondent-accused, he went to A.C.B. Police Station, and lodged the complaint against the respondent-accused. Page 3 of 9 Uploaded by MAYA S. CHAUHAN(HC01402) on Wed May 21 2025 Downloaded on : Wed May 21 21:33:29 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/51/2007 ORDER DATED: 14/05/2025 undefined 3.3 According to the prosecution case, after registration of the offence, Mr. Kulkarni, Police Inspector called two persons from the Government office to remain as panch and in their presence, the complainant narrated the facts of his complaint to the panchas. Thereafter, the necessary experiment of enthracene powder and ultra violet lamp were carried out on the currency note by A.C.B. personnel and number of currency note was noted down in the panchnama. The currency note was put in the pocket of the complainant with an instruction to give money after demand was being made by the respondent- accused and also instructed to give gesture as and when the respondent-accused accepted the bribe amount. 3.4 It is the further case of the prosecution that the Panch No.1 was instructed to remain present with the complainant and hear and see whatever conversation is being made between the complainant and the respondent- accused and the transaction of demand and acceptance of the amount. The Panch No 2 and A.C.B. Staff were instructed to remain there and tried to see and hear whatever is being done there. Thereafter, the first part of panchnama was prepared in the office of A.C.B. office Page 4 of 9 Uploaded by MAYA S. CHAUHAN(HC01402) on Wed May 21 2025 Downloaded on : Wed May 21 21:33:29 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/51/2007 ORDER DATED: 14/05/2025 undefined on 09.04.1996 between 11:20 to 13:10.
3.5 It is the further case of the prosecution that thereafter, the A.C.B. Staff, the complainant and two panchas proceeded towards the office of the respondent- accused in a Government vehicle. That the complainant and Panch No.1 went ahead and met the respondent- accused. That the conversation of demand and acceptance was made between the complainant and the respondent- accused and the respondent-accused demanded the marked currency notes from the complainant. After giving bribe amount to the respondent-accused, the complainant made a gesture to the raiding party and, hence, the raiding party rushed there and caught hold of the respondent-accused and after introducing themselves to the respondent-accused, search of the respondent-accused was carried out and found the marked currency notes from the pocket of the respondent-accused. 3.6 It is the further case of the prosecution that P.I. got the marked currency notes from the pocket of the shirt of the respondent-accused and, thereafter, they went to the Office of the A.C.B. Thereafter, the experiment of Page 5 of 9 Uploaded by MAYA S. CHAUHAN(HC01402) on Wed May 21 2025 Downloaded on : Wed May 21 21:33:29 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/51/2007 ORDER DATED: 14/05/2025 undefined ultra violet lamp was carried out on the hands of the complainant, the respondent-accused, Panch No.1 and other members of the raiding party and found signs of powder. Thereafter, the said marked currency notes were seized and the number of the same was tallied with the numbers noted down in the preliminary panchnama and necessary receipt thereof was given to the respondent- accused. After completion of all formalities, second part of panchnama was prepared, wherein Investigating Officer and panchas have signed. Accordingly, the complaint came to be registered for the offences punishable under Sections 7, 13(1)(d) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act.
3.7 On the basis of complaint, investigation was embarked upon and the respondent-accused came to be arrested on 11.09.1996. On completion of the same, on the basis of the material collected against the respondent-accused, since the Investigating Officer found a prima-facie case against the respondent-accused, chargesheet came to be filed before the Special Court on 31.01.1997.
Page 6 of 9 Uploaded by MAYA S. CHAUHAN(HC01402) on Wed May 21 2025 Downloaded on : Wed May 21 21:33:29 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/51/2007 ORDER DATED: 14/05/2025 undefined 3.8 Vide Exh. 4, charge came to be framed and vide Exh. 5, further statement of the respondent-accused was recorded, wherein he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
3.9 During the course of trial, the prosecution produced elaborate evidence both documentary as well as oral and examined Prosecution Witness No.1 viz., Hussain Ahmad Shaikh, Exh. 13 (Complainant), Prosecution Witness No.2 viz., Prakashhbai Ramubhai Patel, Exh. 14 (Panch Witness), Prosecution Witness No.3 viz., Gulabsing Lalsing Page, Exh.24, Prosecution Witness No.4 viz., Ambapratapsinh Chandravijaysinh Jadeja, Exh. 26 and Prosecution Witness No.5 viz., Ajabsinh Mulsinh Rathod, Exh.28 and produced approximately 9 documentary evidence to substantiate the charge in favour of the chargesheet.
3.10 On appreciation of oral as well as documentary evidence and after hearing the arguments advanced by the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, the Learned Special Judge, Surat was pleased to acquit the respondent-accused holding inter alia that the Page 7 of 9 Uploaded by MAYA S. CHAUHAN(HC01402) on Wed May 21 2025 Downloaded on : Wed May 21 21:33:29 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/51/2007 ORDER DATED: 14/05/2025 undefined prosecution had failed to prove the circumstances relied upon for the purpose of establishing the guilt of the accused by any reliable or satisfactory evidence.
4. Learned APP Mr. Soaham Joshi has taken me through the evidence. Upon going through the same, it seems that in the complaint, the complainant had stated that a sum of Rs.500/- towards the bribe was given to the accused. However, in his deposition, he has stated that Rs.400/- was given in the presence of the raiding party. Subsequently, the complainant has also stated that out of Rs.400/-, Rs.375 was given towards the official charges of preferring an application towards taking out a lease agreement for fishing in respect of certain pond/lake in village Jiav near Surat. In the statement of the accused under section 313 of the Cr.P.C., the accused has specifically stated that upon receiving Rs.400/- towards the application money, even before he could offer the complainant the change of Rs.25, the raiding party came and caught him.
5. It is also seen that the complainant was declared hostile and cross examined by the prosecution. Thus, I Page 8 of 9 Uploaded by MAYA S. CHAUHAN(HC01402) on Wed May 21 2025 Downloaded on : Wed May 21 21:33:29 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/51/2007 ORDER DATED: 14/05/2025 undefined am of the opinion that the central thrust of the prosecution being the demand and acceptance of a bribe amount of Rs.500/- has fallen, inasmuch as, the complainant has categorically deposed that not only was a sum of Rs.500/- not paid on the spot but out of a sum of Rs.400/- that was actually paid, Rs.375 was towards the application money for the lease agreement in respect of a fishing contract. In such view of the matter and also taking into account that the sanction was granted without taking into account the aforesaid circumstances, coupled with the fact that the sanctioning authority was not even examined by the prosecution, I am of the view that the learned Trial Court had correctly acquitted the accused. In these circumstances, there is no occasion to take any other view and resultantly, the instant appeal is dismissed.
6. Record and Proceedings to be sent back to the concerned Court forthwith.
(D.N.RAY,J) MAYA Page 9 of 9 Uploaded by MAYA S. CHAUHAN(HC01402) on Wed May 21 2025 Downloaded on : Wed May 21 21:33:29 IST 2025