JUDGMENT

Mr. Sushil Kumar, Senior Advocate is appointed as amicus curiae on behalf of the appellant to assist the Court.

2. The appellant-accused in this case was prosecuted for the offence under S. 5 (2) read with clause (a) of sub-sec. (1) of S. 5 of the Prevention of Corruption Act read with S. 161,I.P.C. for allegedly having accepted an amount of Rs. 75 / - as a bribe for sanctioning the bills of the complainant contractor. The prosecution case is that at the relevant time, the appellant was employed as an Accounts Officer with the Lucknow Electric Supply Undertaking. He was, in fact, on deputation from the Railways. One of his duties was to pre-audit the bills given by the contractors like the complainants for the supply of goods made to the Undertaking. The case of the prosecution is that at the relevant time, two bills of the complainant were pending sanction. According to the prosecution further he had made a demand of bribe to the extent of 2 per cent of the amount of the said bills. Accordingly, a trap was arranged and on 11th March, 1970, the accused was caught in the actual act of accepting Rs. 75 / - which were paid by the complainant as a bribe to him.

3. At the trial,