The main legal point established in the judgment is that the prosecution must provide substantive evidence of the demand and acceptance of bribe money, and the work of the complainant must be pending with the accused at the time of the alleged offense.

JUDGMENT

1. The present appeal is filed by the State/Lokayukta challenging the judgment passed in Special Case No.577/2010 dtd. 7/7/2015 on the file of Principal District and Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi.

2. Brief facts of the case are as under :-

One Mahesh lodged a complaint with Lokayukta Police on 25/2/2009 stating that his cousin Smt.Akkamahadevi has applied for Staff Nurse post and she has been serving as Staff Nurse in Primary Health Care Centre, Hasinapur village in Shorapur Taluk and she has to furnish the caste certificate for the purpose of drawing salary and she had applied the same to the District Backward Classes and Minority Welfare Office, Kalaburagi. In that regard, the complainant met one Ramesh (accused) who in turn demanded for Rs.2,000.00 as illegal gratification for furnishing the caste certificate. Since the complainant was not interested in paying the same, the discussion took place and it was reduced to Rs.1,000.00. Complainant was not even interested for the said amount and therefore, he approached the Lokayukta Police. Being convinced about the conservation that took place between the accused-Ramesh and the complainant, Lokayukta Police registered a case in Crime No.2/2009 for the offences punishable under Ss. 7, 13(1)(d) read with Sec. 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and arranged for the trap. On the same day at about 5.15 p.m. in the evening the accused met the complainant in Shanthi Sagar Hotel and near the pan shop, the accused took the illegal gratification of a sum of Rs.1,000.00 which was in the denomination of two Rs.500.00 currency notes smeared with phenolphthalein powder and pre-signal was given and trap party raided on the accused and recovered the tainted money from the custody of the accused and conducted the colour test and arrested the accused and drafted a trap mahazar. Thereafter, accused was arrested and the matter was investigated and Lokayukta police filed charge-sheet.

3. Presence of accused was secured before the learned Magistrate and Charge was framed. Accused pleaded not guilty and trial was held.

4. In order to prove the case of the prosecution, prosecution in all e*amined 13 witnesses as PWs.1 to 13 and relied on 23 documents which were e*hibited and marked as E*s.P1 to P.23. 10 material objects were also relied on by the prosecution, which were marked as MOs.1 to 10.

5. On conclusion of the prosecution evidence, accused statement as contemplated under Sec. 313 of Cr.P.C was recorded. Wherein the accused has denied all the the incriminatory materials found against him and has answered before the court that he would submit written submissions before the court as is contemplated under Sec. 313(5) of Cr.P.C. Likewise, he has furnished the written submission wherein he has stated that he has not obtained any money from the complainant-Mahesh and the tainted money was trusted into his pant pocket by the complainant with ulterior motive.

6. Taking note of these aspects of the matter and also taking note of the admissions given by PW.10 who is actual applicant who sought for issuance of caste certificate, the learned trial Judge acquitted the accused by the impugned judgment.

7. Being aggrieved by the same, the Lokayukta has preferred the present appeal with the following grounds :-

* That, the Trial Court has without proper appreciation of the evidence and material placed on record by the prosecution has proceed to pass the judgment and order acquitting the accused/respondent for the offences he has been charge sheeted, hence the same is liable to be set aside. * That, the reasons assigned by the learned Special Judge while passing the order of acquittal of the charged offence are not justifiable and unsustainable in the eye of law. * That, the prosecution has e*amined in all 13 witnesses as PW-1 to PW-13 and got marked E* P-1 To P-23. All the witnesses have supported the case of the prosecution. PW-1 and 2 who are the punch witnesses have deposed before the court regar