Judgment

KRISHNA IYER, J. :- The appellant, a quondam Inspector of Central Excise has argued his case with perspicacity and plausibility, taking liberal advantage of our solicitude for giving this layman a lengthy hearing. The charge, broadly stated, is one of corruption falling under Section 161, Indian Penal Code, and Section 5(1)(d), read with section 5(2), of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947; the proof of guilt is built on a trap laid by the Special Police Establishment, apparently clinched by processes of chemical detection; and the uphill task of the accused is to challenge in this court, under Article 136, the concurrent findings upholding his culpability. Undaunted, he has attempted to explain the incriminating evidence with adroitness worthy of a better cause and has taken us critically through the testimony of the P. Ws. In an effort to substantive a credible case for his exculpation.

2. Now, the story, P. W. 1, a young man in his late twenties, had started a small factory in Shadara, called Uma Engineering Corporation, for making insulated copper cables, around June, 1965. The whole process, except fitting the rubber insulation, was done in his premises and for this