JUDGMENT :

1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order passed by the High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore in Criminal Appeal No. 1825 of 2002, dated 29.10.2007, whereby and where under the High Court has reversed the order of acquittal passed by the Trial Court and has convicted and sentenced the Appellant-herein for the offences punishable Under Section 7 and Section 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (for short, "the PC Act"). The brief facts of the prosecution case are that the Appellant-herein was working as a clerk in the Public Works Department, Division Office, Yadgir. The complainant's house was let out on rent to the Block Development Office for running a SC & ST Hostel, and the Block Development Officer sent a requisition to the Public Works Department for estimating the rental value of the house. The file was pending for approval before the Executive Engineer, Public Works Department, Division Office, Yadgir, therefore the complainant visited the office wherein he met the Appellant. The Appellant asked for a bribe of Rs. 3,500/- to get the process completed for estimation of the rental value of the complainant's house. When the complainant expressed his inability to pay such a large sum of money, the Appellant agreed to accept Rs. 1,500/- in advance and Rs. 2,000/- at a later point in time.

2. On 26.06.1996 a complaint was filed before the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Karnataka Lokayukta, Gulbarga on the basis of which a case was registered Under Section 7 and Section 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the PC Act. Pre-trap proceedings, including smearing the trap money worth Rs. 1,500/- with phenolphthalein powder, were completed. Thereafter, the complainant along with panch witnesses and Lokayukta Police Officers went to the Appellant's office. The complainant and panch witness (PW-7) went inside the office and the complainant handed over the tainted currency notes to the Appellant. At about 3:30 p.m. they came out of the office, and on their signal the trap team entered the Appellant's office. The tainted currency notes were found in the pant pocket of the Appellant. The notes, the pant pocket, and the hands of the Appellant were washed in sodium carbonate solution and the solution turned pink.

3. After the completion of investigation and obtaining of sanction, a charge-sheet was filed against the Appellant. Thereafter, the Appellant appeared before the Trial Court and after both sides were heard, charges were framed Under Sections 7 and Section 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the PC Act. The charges were read over and explained to the Appellant who pleaded not guilty. Accordingly, the case was committed to Trial.

4. In order to substantiate the charges framed against the Appellant, the prosecution examined nine witnesses including the complainant, panch witnesses, and the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Karnataka Lokayukta, who led the trap team. The prosecution also presented 21 documents and six material objects as evidence. After the completion of prosecution evidence, the statement of the Appellant was recorded Under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, "the Code") wherein he pleaded innocence. No evidence was led in defense of the Appellant.

5. On a detailed examination of the prosecution evidence, the Trial Court held that the evidence of the complainant created fatal doubts in the prosecution case as the complainant had given two different versions in his examination-in-chief and cross examination. The complainant stated in his complaint that the Appellant had asked for a bribe of Rs. 1,500/-, while during his examination-in-chief the complainant stated that the Appellant had asked the complainant to purchase Army tickets worth Rs. 1,500/- or else his work would not get done. However, during his cross-examination the complainant stated that the sum of Rs. 1,500/- was given to the Appellant for the purchase of Army tickets