1. The material facts of the prosecution case disclose that one Arasappa-complainant was working as SDA in the office of Tahsildar at Sindhanoor. There were allegations against him. Petitioner No.1 was the Tahsildar at Sindhanoor for the period in question. The petitioner No.2 was working as FDA in the office of the Tahsildar, Sindhanoor in Establishment Branch. On the report of petitioner No.1, the complainant was deputed to work in Nada kacheri at Jewalagera. The complainant found the posting at Jewalagera is inconvenient. The deputation could have been cancelled only on the further report of the Tahsildar to the Assistant Commissioner.

2. The complainant in order to seek cancellation of deputation and also for payment of Festival Advance approached Petitioner No.1 at his residence on 09.10.2007. Petitioner No.1 tells the complainant to meet Petitioner No.2. When the complainant meets petitioner No.2, he tells that complainant should pay Rs.10,000/-as illegal gratification to the petitioner No.1 and Rs.500/-for him. The complainant meets petitioner No.1 on 11.10.07. In the discussion, petitioner No.1 agreed to do favour on payment of Rs.5000 to him and Rs.500 to petiti