The High Court · 2025

3. The brief facts of the case are that resl;onder-rt/ accused worked as t.he Assistant Engineer in Panchayath Raj Department in Telkapallr. Mandal of Mahabubnagar District liom 125.08.2004 to 02.O5.2OrlB; that by virtue of the post held by him, he was a Public Servzrnt u,ithin the meaning of Section 2(< ) of the Act. It is stated that the Chief Executive Officer (CEC) o1' the Zllla Parishad, Mahabubnagar sanctioned an amount ol Rs 2,50,O00/- \ 2 for construction of B.C.Comrnunity Hall for Yadava Sangham in Gattunellikkuduru Village 1n Telkapally Mandal; that the said work as was allotted to the de facto complainant/PW1 for construction on the nomination of rvork made bv the Executive Engineer, Panchayath Raj Department (PW6); that on O7.12.2OO7, an agreement was entered into by PWl with PW6 and as per the terms of the sard agreement, the work was scheduled to be completed w,ithin six months from the date of the said agreement; that PW 1 completed the work within the stipulated time and he received a part of the amount of Rs. 1,30,OO0/- from the Panchayath Raj Department; that on completion of the work, a remaining amount of Rs.1,20,000/- was due to hirn; accused was supervising the u'ork of PW1 by noting the measurements in the Measurements Book (trx P1O) and was also preparing the bills meant to be forwarded to the Office of the Executive Engineer (PW6) for the purpose of the grant of the amount payable to PWl.

4. It is stated that on 21.04.2008, PW1 approached the accused at his residence in Nagarkurnool and requested him to take the measllrements of his work and prepare a bill so as to forward the same to the Executive Engineer and that the accused demanded for the payment of a bribe of Rs.10,0OO/ for doing the r.-..,***rati l) J work; that on 26.04.2008 PW1 again approache<.l the accused at the residenr:e of the latter and renewed his r:quest, but the accused still repeated his demand for the paym:1lt of the bribe. After several entreaties made by PW 1, the 26-s11sed reduced the bribe amount to Rs.7,O00/- but made it clear (.o PW 1 that the n ork of PVr'l would not be done unless the dermetnd of the accused was met u,ith; that PW1 was reluctant to pay the bribe amount to the accused and hence, on 29.O4.2O01i, I-re ',rrent to the office of PW9 in Hyderabad, where he submitted Ex Pl report to PWg. PW9 directed PW 1 to come to the olfice of the Inspector, ACB, Mahabubnagar on 01.O5.2OO8 and to bring th,: p111ro".6 bribe amount of Rs.7,OOO/ u,ith him. In the meantime, PW9 got made discreet enquiries about the tmthfulness cf the contents of Ex P 1 anrl having been satisfied about t he prtma facie truthfulness, of those contents and after getting the approv:rl from the DG, ACII, Hvderabad, PW9 registered Ex P14lFIR against the accused on O 1.05.2008 at the office of the Inspector, ACB, Mahabubnagar.

5. It is further stated that PW9 also got st'curecl P\I'3 and LW3, the two Government Servants u,ork ing in ,\nimal Husbandry Department to act as the mediators for tlre intended trap of the accused; that necessary arrangemerLts were made in i \ .... i I t I i I I i I I I I t i I ! I I I I I t i I I 4 the office of the Inspector, ACB, Mahabubnagar from iO:00 A.M. to 10:45 A.M. on 01.05.2008 as noted in Ex P5 report of the pre-trap proceedings by PW3 for the intended trap of the accused during which, the tainted cash of Rs.7,00O/- smeared rvith phenolphthalein povvder was kept in the left side shirt pocket of PW i with a clear instruction to hand over the same to the accused only on a specific demand made by the accused for the payment olthe bribe; that PW9 asked PW2, accompanied by PW1 to observe the happenings between PWl and the accused and also to give a signal to the trap party by u'iping his face r,r,ith a hand kerchief soon after the receipt of the bribe amount by the accused from PWl. A scientific Sodium Carbonate test was also demonstrated by PW9 and its significance was explained by him to the members present there. Later, the trap party members proceeded to Nagarkurnool on a Tata Sumo Vehicle after leaving the Office of the Inspector, ACB, Mahabubnagar at 1O:45 A.M. and reached the bus stand at Nagarkurnool at about i 1:45 A.M.

6. It is further stated that PWs.1 and 2 proceeded to the house of the accused in Srinagar Colony, Nagarkurnool and the trap party members followed them from a short distance. After PWs. 1 and 2 entered into the house of the accused, the members of the trap party took vantage position around that house waiting for. I I 5 the signal frcm PW2. The accused enquired PWl about the bribe amount and after getting an affirmative answel lrom PW 1 , the accused demanded PWl to pay the bribe amou t-rt to him. PW1 took out the talnted cash from his left side srirt pocket and handed over the same to the accused. The accused rerceived the same with his right hand and kept on a table arrd also put MO7 calculator over the same as a weight. PW2 came ,lut of the house of the accused and gave the pre arranged signal t.o the trap party members and on seeking the same, the trap party members rushed into the house of the accused. PW9 instn rcted PWs.1 and 2 to wait outside till they would be called.

7. The hrrgers of both the hands of the accuse:d were tested in the Sodium Carbonate solution prepared in tw,r separate glass tumblers and the wash of the right hand finger,'; of the accused yielded a positive result with the change of tl:e colour of the solution into pink and the same was preserved r-rnder MO3. The wash of the lelt hand fingers of the accused remained colourless and the sarne \vas preserved under MO4. The tainted cash of Rs.7,OOO/- shown by the accused as lying underneatb MO7 calculator or-r the table has been compared with t.ee description of the currencl' notes noted in Ex P5 by PW3 ancl other mt:diator and after"th ey found the same tallied, PW9 sei;,red MO5 tainted \' 1 6 cash of Rs.7,OOO/-. The bottom portion of MO7, a Casio Calculator, was swiped with a cotton swab and the same was also tested in a freshly prepared Sodium Carbonate Solution and that test also proved positive with the change of the coiour of the solution into pink and the same was also. preserved under MO6. MO7 calculator was also seized by Pw9. MO8 sample of the Sodium Carbonate powder used for the test was preserved in the same manner of preserving MOs.1 and 2 samples of the phenolphthalein powder and the Sodium Carbonate powder used for the demonstration of the Sodium Carbonate test conducted during the pre-trap proceedings. The accused was questioned by PW9 and his version was recorded. PWs. 1 and 2 were called and enquired by PW9 for the events taken place between them and the accused and their versions were also noted in Ex P6 report by PW3. The respective versions of PWs. I and 2 on one side and the accused on the other side were confronted to each other and what all stated by them had been incorporated in Ex P6 report. The accused was arrested by PW9 and he was furnished a copy of trx P6 and in token of the receipt of the same, his signature was obtained by PW9. Thereafter, PW9 visited the office of the Deputy Executive Engineer, Panchayath Raj Department in Nagarkurnool (PWS), where he seized trx P 1O and Ex P 1 5 file relating to the n 7 construction work of PWl frorn PW4, the typist rvorking in that office under Ex P16 seizure list. The copy r.rf Ex P16 was furnished to PW4 and his signature r.r,as obtainecl on Ex PW16 in token of the receipt of the said copy. The accus,ld wa.s arrested and produccd before the Court on 02.05.2008 for the judicral custody and subsequentl-v, he was enlarged on ba.i1 B. It is further submitted that PW 1 0 to ok up further investigation. during which he recorded the staternents of some of the u,itnesses and secured Ex P12 job chart of the accused from PW9; after completion of the investigation and on receipt of Ex P13, G.O. issued by the Government thereby granting sanction for the criminal prosecution of the accused, PW10 submitted the draft final report to the DG, ACB, Hyderabad and after the r-eceipt of the said ,approval, PW10 filed charge sheet erlleging thal the accused corrlmitted the offences punishable under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) r/w Section 13(2) of the Act.

9. This czrse r,vas taken on file under Section,; 7 and 13(1)(d) r/w Section 13(2) of the Act against the accu,;ed and on the appearance of the accused before the Court, tlie copies of the charge sheet and all the annexlrres thereto were lurnished t:o him in strict compliance of Section 2O7 of Cr.P.C ) I 8

10. After hearing the learned Special Public Prosecutor and the learned counsei for the accused and upon consideration of the entire material placed by the prosecution, the accused was examined under Sections 239 and 240 of Cr.P.C. and the charges under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) r/w Section 13(2) of the Act r,vere framed against the accused and the said charges were read over and explained to him under Section 240(21 Cr.P.C. and the accused having understood the same, denied the offences, pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. 1 1. In order to bring home the guilt of the accused, the prosecution examined PWs.1 to 1O and marked Exs.Pl to P16 and MOs.1 to 8. On behalf of defense, DWI was examined and trxs.Dl and D2 were marked.

12. Upon careful scrutiny of the oral and documentary evidence, the trial Court vide impugned judgment, acquitted the respondent for the alleged offences. Aggrieved by the same, the appellant preferred the Appeal.

13. Learned counsel lor the appellant submits that PW t had turned hostile; that the learned Judge of the trial Court, without consiclering the crucial evidence of PW2, erroneously held that no official work was pending with respondent as on the date of trap I l I 9 and that there is no evidence of acceptance ol bribe amount Therefore, relying on the decision passed by tlie Hon'ble Apex Court in Manikrao Abaji Thonge Vs. State oll Maharashtral, M.Narsinga Rao Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh2 rrncl the State of Karnataka Vs. Chandrasha3, he seeks to allcru, the Criminal Appeal

14. Learned counsei for respondent contend:; that the trial Court upon careful consideration of the matelial ar.ailable on record in proper perspective, rightly passed the impugned order and interference of this Court, at this stage, isr not warranted. Therefore, he seeks to dismiss the Criminal Appeitl.

15. On caleful scrutiny of the oral and documentarr' evidence, the trial Court observed that the demand and acceptzrnce of the bribe by the accused could not be established b_v the prrosecution beyond reasonable doubt and, furthermore, there is ample evidence on record to shou, that no official favour rvas pending with the accused as on the date of the alleged trap of the accused since the accused is shown to have completed tLe rvork of taking the measurements and sending of Ex P10 book tc PW5 on qp.03.2008 itsel!,which u,as long prior to the dales of the a11ege9_ t 1993 Crl.L.J 3/96 (Bom) MANU/SC/0802/2000 MANU /SC / 12:15 12021 I l0 demand on 21.04.2008 and on 26.04.2008 and finally on O1.05.2008 and, under those circumstances, no presumption can be drar,i,n under Section 2O(1) of the Act by placing over emphasis on the mere recovery of MO5 from the house of the accused under Ex P6 report, of which PWl has- himself given an explanation that the respondent-accused pushed out MO5 tainted currency with his right hand by refusing to receive the same when offered by PW 1. Therefore, relying on the decision passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Banarasi Dass Vs. State of Haryanaa, the trial Court heid that the respondent-accused is entitled for benefit of doubt and rendered the impugned judgment.

16. Having regard to the submissions of both the learned counsel and on considering the material available on record, this Court is of the opinion that no convincing evidence is placed by the prosecution about the demand and acceptance of the bribe amount by the accused. From the testimonies of PWs.4 to 6, it is apparent that the accused has completed his role and no official favour was pending with him so as to make PWI to pay the amount to the accused. The Honlole tye-1._1"- -Court in ' zoto (t).ql-o (c.\gfc) lI I C.M.Girish Babu Vs. CBI5, held that mere recov,lry of the money from the porssession of the accused by itself is nrtt enough in the absence of substantive evidence for demand and aLcceptance. Therefore, l.he prosecution had failed to pro.,,e demand and acceptance of the bribe for doing an official favour l:v the accused.

17. It is rna:ll settled iarn, that in an appeal agailrst ac,quitlal, the appellate Court is circumscribed by the lim itation that no interference has to be made u.ith the order unlcss the aporoach made by the trial Court to the consideratior of evidence is vitiated by some manifest illegality or the conclusion recorded by it is such, v,hich could not have been possibiy a,rriveci at cy any Court acting reasonably and judiciously and is therefore. to be characterized as perverse. There is no embargo cn the appellate Court revievdng the evidence upon u,hich an ord,:r of zrcquittal is based. Generally, the order of acquittal shall rrot be interfered with because the presumption of innocence of the .accu sed is further strengthened by acquittal. The golden thread rvhich runs through the u.eb of administration of justice in <:riminal cases is that if two views are possible on the evidence adduced in the case, one pointing to the guilt of the accused anc the other to his I 5 ArR (2ooelsEli22 12 innocence, the view which is favourable to the accused should be adopted.

18. ln Mrinal Das Vs. State of Tripura6 the Apex Court held as under: "lt is clear that in an appeal against acquittai in the absence of pen ersity in the judgment and order, interference by this Court exercising its extraordinary jurisdiction, is not warranted. However, il the appeal is heard by an appellate court, being the final court of fact, is fully competent to re appreciate, reconsider and review the evidence ald take its own decision. In other words, law does not prescribe any iimitation, restriction or condition on exercise of such power ald the appellate court is free to arrive at its own conclusion keeping in mind that acquittal provides for presumption in favour of the accused. The presumption of innocence is available to the person and in criminal jurisprudence every person is presumed to be innocent unless he is proved guilty by the competent court. If two reasonabie views are possible on the basis of the evidence on record, the appellate court should not disturb the findings of acquittal. There is no limitation on the part of the appellate court to review the evidence upon which the order of acquittal is found and to come to its own conclusion. The appellate court can a1so review the u (2ol l) 9 scc 479 ,' i i I I t l3 conclusion arrived at by the trial Court with respecl. to both facts and law. While dealing with the appeal against acquittal preferred by the State, it is the dutv of the appeliate court to marshal the entire evidence on recorc and only by giving cogent and :rdequate r-easons set aside the judgment of acquittal. ,r\n order of acquittal is to be interfered with only r.r,h en there are "compelling and substantial reasons" for dc:ing so. If the order is "clea-r1y unreasonable", it is a comFelling reason for inl.erference. When the trial Court has; igno.:ed the evider,ce or misread the material e',.ide:nce ,rr. haS ignored material documents like declaration/ report of ballistic experts etc., :he appellate court is competent to reverse the decisiorL of tl-re trial Court depending on the materials placed."

19. In Maloth Somaraju Vs. State oJ Andhra PradeshT tine ( t Apex Court held that there can be no t',r,o opinions that merely because the acquittal is found to be wrong and rrnother vieu,can be taken, the judgment of acquittal cannot be upset. The appellate Court has more and serious responsibi:it1. lr,hile dealing with the judgment of acquittal and unless the acquittai is found to be perverse or not at all supportable and whr:re the appellate Court come s to the conclusion that conviction is a must, the judgment oi acquittal cannot be upset. The apprellate Court has '120r ry 8 scc 63:i I I I I : . . , l4 to examine as to whether the trial Court, while upsetting the acquittal, has taken such care. 20 . In view of the Judgments referred to above and for the a-foresaid reasons, I am of the view that there are no merits in this Criminal Appeal and the same is liable to be dismissed

21. Accordingly, this Criminal Appeal is dismissed. As a sequel thereto, Miscellaneous Petitions, if anir, pending shall stand closed. //TRUE COPY// To, SD/- P. GOWRI SHANKAR DEPUTY REGISTRAR tuSEC FFICER I I '1 . The First Additional Special Judge for SPE and ACB Cases-cum-V Additional 2. The Station Hou'se Officer, Anti Corruption Bureau Police Station, Hyderabad 3. Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana at Chief Judge, City Civil Courts, Hyderabad. Hyderabad [OUT]

4. Ohe CC to Sri T.Bala Mohan Reddy(SC FOR ACB SPL PP TS) Advocate loPUcl

5. bne CC to Sri Sudhakar ReCdy lr4addula, Advocate [OPUC] 6. Two CD Copies NVBigh HIGH COURT DATED:2010612025 JUDGMENT CRLA.No.123 ot 2014 1 / -.) ,.i, vt. 6 >l 2'- ) a I {t 1E SiP 2ffi './ .ti!)j'.i--, .1. THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS DISMISSEI) ($ 11\8