BABJI Vs STATE PF ANDHRA PRADESH
Bench: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE R. BANUMATHI, HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINEET SARAN
Judgment by: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE R. BANUMATHI
Case number: Crl.A. No.-002159-002159 / 2009
Diary number: 17511 / 2008
Advocates: ANIL KUMAR TANDALE Vs
MUKESH KUMAR MARORIA
1
REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 2159 OF 2009
BABJI ...APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH ...RESPONDENT(S)
J U D G M E N T
R. BANUMATHI,J.
1. Being aggrieved by the conviction under Section 8 of
the Prevention of Corruption Act, the appellant has
preferred this appeal.
2. The case of the prosecution is that PW-4 Sumeet
Asthana gave Ex.P1-complaint to Vigilance Officer, Indian
Airlines, Hyderabad, stating that he had approached the
Indian Airlines Office on 20.06.1995 for reservation of a
seat in Flight I.C. No. 948 for his travel to Madras on
21.06.1995 but there was a long waiting list and that an
employee of the Indian Airlines, whom he does not know, had
told him contact Babji (A-1) of M/s Varun Movies at Srinagar
Colony, Hyderabad. PW-4 had approached A-1 on 01.06.1995 and
A1 told him that there was long waiting list but he can
arrange a confirmed ticket and demanded Rs.2,100/- as
against the actual fair of Rs. 1646/-. On receipt of the
said complaint PW-1, the Manager, Vigilance, Indian
2
Airlines, Hyderabad, gave report Ex.P-2 to the
Superintendent of Police, CBI Hyderabad stating that A-1 and
A-2 are cheating the public.
3. Based on the evidence of PW-4 and PW-2 who
accompanied PW-4, the Trial Court has convicted the
appellant under Section 8 of the Prevention of Corruption
Act (for short the ‘Act’) which was confirmed by the High
Court.
4. We have heard Mr. P. Venkat Reddy, learned counsel
appearing for the appellant as well as Mr. P.K. Dey,
learned counsel appearing for the CBI.
5. In order to establish the offence under Section 8 of
the Prevention of Corruption Act it must be proved:
(i) That the accused accepted or obtained, or
agreed to accept, or attempted to obtain, from
someone;
(ii) For himself or for some other person;
(ii) Any gratification whatever;
(iv) As a motive or reward for inducing by
corrupt or illegal means any ‘public servant’ to do
or forbear to do any official act or to show favour
or render any service to any of the persons
specified in the section.
6. In order to constitute an offence under Section 8 of
the Act, three things are essential. In the first place
there must have been the solicitation or receipt of the
gratification. Secondly, such gratification must have been
3
asked for or paid as a motive or reward for inducing a
public servant to do an act or do a favour or render some
service as stated under Section 8 of the Act. In the
present case, the evidence adduced by the prosecution is
vague for whom the appellant had demanded the money and
whether the person for whom the appellant demanded and
received the money is a public servant. Though the receiver
of the money, like in the present case may not be a public
servant, the prosecution has to establish by convincing
evidence that the amount must have been received for
inducing a public servant for doing something by that public
servant in his official capacity. So far as confirmation of
the seat in the Indian Airlines, there may be persons in the
middle who may be a public servant or a travel agency or
others. In the absence of convincing evidence to show that
the appellant had received the money from PW-4,to induce a
public servant to get the confirmation of the ticket, the
conviction of the appellant under Section 8 of the PC Act
cannot be sustained. In the result the appeal is allowed
and the appellant is acquitted.
The appellant is on bail. His bail bonds shall stand
discharged.
….......................J. [R. BANUMATHI]
…......................J. [VINEET SARAN]
NEW DELHI 9th AUGUST, 2018