IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1320 OF 2006   

   STATE OF A.P. ..... APPELLANT

VERSUS

   GURENDAGANTA ANASUYA ..... RESPONDENT

O R D E R

We  have  heard  the  learned  counsel  for  the  

parties.

The  respondent  herein  was  convicted  and  

sentenced by the Special Judge for offences punishable  

under Section 7 and 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of the  

Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, and was awarded a  

sentence of simple imprisonment for  one year and to  

pay  a  fine  of  Rs.  1000/-  and  in  default  to  suffer  

further  simple  imprisonment  for  six  months.   She,  

thereupon, filed an appeal before the High Court of  

Judicature, Andhra Pradesh which has been allowed by  

the impugned judgment.  The High Court has recorded a  

finding of fact on an appreciation of the evidence that  

P.W. 1 – the complainant was a busy body switching  

political and personal loyalties without the slightest  

hesitation, well-acquainted with the ways of the world,  

and that it would have been impossible for him in that

situation  to  have  gone  to  a  lady  doctor  who  was  a  

Gynaecologist to seek an operation for an ulcer in the  

stomach.   The  High  Court  has  also  found  that  the  

defence  evidence  produced  by  the  accused  was  to  be  

preferred  to  the  prosecution  evidence.   Another  

significant factor which weighed with the High Court  

was that the amount of Rs. 150/- which represented the  

bribe money had been recovered from the top of the  

table which was being used by the respondent and that  

this  story  was  unacceptable  as  tainted  money  would  

never be left for public display and would, ordinarily,  

be immediately hidden in a drawer or would be concealed  

somewhere  else.  The  Court  also  found  that  the  

respondent had accepted  the position that the sodium  

carbonate solution had turned pink, after her hands had  

been washed but had pleaded that she had handled the  

money inadvertently as it was lying on the table in  

front of her.  In any case, the High Court has given  

cogent reasons for recording an acquittal and we would  

be hesitant to upset the judgment in appeal.

Dismissed.

    ..................J      [HARJIT SINGH BEDI]

    ..................J      [T.S. THAKUR]

NEW DELHI NOVEMEBR 26, 2009.