A public servant who demands and accepts a bribe as a motive or reward for doing an official act is guilty of an offence under Section 5(2) read with Section 5(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and Section 161 of the Indian Penal Code.

( 1 ) THE appellant has been convicted of offences under S. 161, Penal Code (for short indian Penal Code ) and S. 5 (2) read with S. 5 (l) (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act ) by a Special Judge vide Judgment dt. 17th Aug. 1982. He has been sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for one year on the first count and rigorous imprisonment for one year and a fine of Rs. 200. 00 on the second count. The sentence of imprisonment on both the counts has, however, been made to run concurrently, Feeling aggrieved, he has preferred this appeal against his conviction and sentence.

( 2 ) THE prosecution case succinctly is that Kishan Lal (Public Witness 6) was employed as a scavenger (safai Karamchari) on daily wages in the Municipal Corporation of Delhi at the relevant time, viz. July 1981. He used to be on duty at Babarpur Road, Shahdara Zone. Shri Madan Lal Guglani was the Sanitary Inspector and was overall incharge of the scavenging force employed in that area. The appellant was also employed as a scavenger in the same area on permanent basis and he used to work for and on behalf of M. L. Guglani and used to mark attendance of the scavengers. He used to harass the complainant-Kishan Lal in case the latter got late in reporting on duty.

( 3 ) IN July 1981 the complainant-Kishan Lal wanted to take leave in connection with the marriage of a relation of his. He talked to the appellant with regard to the same on 3rd July 1981. The appellant told him that he would charge Rs. 4. 00 per day from him i. e. the complainant and in case he wanted leave for eight days he would have to pay Rs. 32. 00 in all. However, the appellant assured him that on the aforesaid amount being paid to him no superior officer would question him and he would be marked even present in the muster-roll. The appellant further told him that in case he did not pay the said amount he would be marked absent and would be produced before superior officer. Kishan Lal told the appellant that he would make arrangement for the necessary amount. However, he resented the demand made by the appellant for the said amount. So, he approached Anti Corruption branch of Delhi Police. Inspector Kewal Krishan (Public Witness 9), who was then S. H. D. Anti Corruption Branch recorded statement Ex. PA of Kishan Lal on 4th July 1981 and the latter signed it in token of its correctness. Inspector Kewal Krishan then arranged for two panch witnesses and called Sh/shri Kulbir Singh (Public Witness 7) and Jamna Dass (Public Witness 8), both of whom were working as Sub-Inspectors in the office of the Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Delhi, to join the investigation as panch witnesses. The complainant presented currency notes of the total value of Rs. 32. 00 to Inspector Kewal Krishan who entered numbers thereof in his pre-raid report Ex. PB which was duly signed by the complainant as well as both the panch witnesses. The currency notes were treated with phenolphthalein powder in the presence of the panch witnesses and the complainant. The procedure was explained to them and by way of demonstration Kulbir Singh was asked to touch the currency notes with his right hand which he did. His hand was then dipped in the colourless solution of sodium carbonate whereupon it turned pink. The Inspector and the panch witnesses then washed their hands and the currency notes were given to Kishan Lal along with necessary instructions. At about 11. 40 A. M. the raid party comprising Inspector Kewal Krishan, complainant-Kishan Lal, panch witnesses Kulbir Singh and Jamna Dass, and Prithvi Raj Bhatia, another Inspector of Police in Anti Corruption Branch (Public Witness 11) arrived at Ghonda Maujpur Road by taxi. The two panch witnesses were made to sit in the shop of a tea vendor while other members of the raid party took positions by the side of the road opposite the tea shop. Kishan Lal went in search of the appellant but he was not available at the place where he us