State Of Mah. Thr. P.S.O., P.S. ... vs Rushikant S/O Kashinath Meshram
2021 Latest Caselaw 14848 Bom

                                             1                                    33 appa 396.2019

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR

                   CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APPA) NO. 396 OF 2019
                                   State of Maharashtra, thr. P.S.O.
                                                 ..vs..
                                  Rushikant s/o Kashinath Meshram

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram,                                Court's or Judge's orders
appearances, Court's orders of directions
and Registrar's orders
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                Ms. T.H. Udeshi, A.P.P. for applicant/appellant.
                                Shri Prakash Naidu, Advocate for non-applicant/respondent.

                                          CORAM : VINAY JOSHI, J.

DATED : 11/10/2021.

Heard.

2. The applicant/State is seeking leave to file appeal to challenge the judgment and order dated 27.08.2018 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge- 11 and Special Judge (P.C. Act.), Nagpur in Special (ACB) Case No.54 of 2015 by which the non- applicant/respondent was acquitted for the offence punishable under Sections 7, 13(1)(d) read with 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. With the assistance of both sides, perused the entire evidence and impugned judgment and order.

3. It is the prosecution case that the accused, who was serving as a Depot Manager, has demanded a bribe of Rs.5000/- to the informant - a Conductor, to flush out an enquiry. The informant in his evidence stated that the accused has demanded bribe of Rs.5,000/-, which was recorded. Then, at the instance of the accused, he has put the bribe amount in the

2 33 appa 396.2019

dickey of vehicle of the accused. It is the prosecution case that immediately, the Anti Corruption Bureau Officers went to the office of the accused and seized tainted currency notes from the Cupboard.

4. Perused the transcribed of voice sample and particularly, the evidence of the informant and the Investigating Officer. Prima faice, there is a demand of bribe and seizure of tainted currency notes from the house of the accused.

                                5.         Learned         Counsel            for             the
                                non-applicant/respondent-accused            attracted         my

attention towards inconsistencies and improbabilities of the evidence. However, at this juncture, meticulous examination of evidence is not warranted. Grant of leave is a primary filter to wipe out unwarranted appeals.

6. Having regard to the material available on record, the matter requires re-appreciation. In view of that, leave granted as prayed. Applications stands disposed of accordingly.

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. _________ OF 2021

Heard. ADMIT.

2. Learned Counsel for the respondent waives notice.

JUDGE Trupti