Judgment

1. Leave granted. The Appellant, who is aggrieved of the judgment and order of concurrent finding of conviction and sentence passed by the High Court of Karnataka for the charges Under Sections 7, 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"), is under challenge in this appeal urging various legal contentions.

2. Firstly, the contention urged by Mr. V. Giri, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the Appellant is that the demand of bribe made by the accused-Appellant on 18.10.2003 with the complainant PW-1, as per Exhibit P-1, the complaint lodged by him with the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Karnataka Lokayukta, Bangalore on 21.10.2003. To prove this important material aspect of demand, the evidence of PW-1 is not corroborated by examining the father of PW-1, who was with him at the time of alleged demand made by the Appellant, therefore, the demand of illegal gratification alleged to have been made is not proved by the prosecution as required Under Section 7 of the Act, and the question of payment of demand, acceptance and recovery of bribe money from the Appellant to constitute an offence Under