Babji vs State Pf Andhra Pradesh

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 Signature Not Verified

arrange a confirmed ticket and demanded Rs.2,100/- as Digitally signed by MADHU BALA Date: 2018.08.13 16:33:10 IST Reason:

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