ORDER

1. THE APPELLANT CALLS IN QUESTION LEGALITY OF THE JUDGMENT RENDERED BY A LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE OF THE GUJARAT HIGH COURT AT AHMEDABAD UPHOLDING HIS CONVICTION UNDER SECTIONS 7 AND 13(L)(D) READ WITH SECTION 13(2) OF THE PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION ACT, 1988 (IN SHORT "THE ACT"). THE LEARNED SPECIAL JUDGE, AHMEDABAD HAD HELD THE ACCUSED-APPELLANT GUILTY AND SENTENCED HIM TO UNDERGO IMPRISONMENT FOR ONE YEAR AND TO PAY A FINE WITH DEFAULT STIPULATIONS FOR EACH OF THE AFORESAID OFFENCES.

2. BACKGROUND FACTS NECESSARY TO BE NOTED FOR DISPOSAL OF THE APPEAL ARE AS FOLLOWS:

PW 3 THE POLICE INSPECTOR, ANTI-CORRUPTION BUREAU, AHMEDABAD HAD RECEIVED INFORMATION ABOUT LARGE-SCALE CORRUPTION IN CERTAIN DEPARTMENTS. HE ASKED PW I A TRADER, TO BE A DECOY AND OFFER MONEY TO THE APPELLANT AT THE OCTROI CHECKPOST. PW 1 THE OWNER OF THE GOODS, AND THE DRIVER WERE TRAVELLING IN THE TRUCK. PW I AGREED TO BE A DECOY AND CERTAIN PANCH WITNESSES WERE CALLED. TWO CLERKS SERVING IN THE OFFICE OF THE MARITIME BOARD AGREED TO BE A PART OF THE PARTY. CURRENCY NOTES SPRINKLED WITH ANTHRACENE POWDER WERE HANDED OVER TO PW 1. THE MANNER IN WHICH THE NOTES WERE TO BE USED WAS ALSO INDICATED TO HIM. IT WAS SUG