( 1 ) THIS appeal has been preferred by the State against the judgment dated 24. 10. 1983 whereby both the accused persons were acquitted by learned Special judge,delhi, of the charges under section 161/34 IPC, under section 5 (2) read with section 5 1 (i) (d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, read with section 34 of IPC.

( 2 ) THE facts relevant for the purpose of deciding this appeal are that one dev Raj Sahni (complainant) was Managing Director of the Company M/s Sahni Sons private Limited at 4/14a, Asaf Ali Road, New Delh. His two sons Rakesh Sahni and Rajesh Sahni were running business in the name of Sahni Sons Manufacturing company, at 3482, Netaji Subhash Marg, Delh. His sons were getting the cabins and wooden partition made in their office through a carpenter on 15. 6. 1980 when accused P. K. Jain, Junior Engineer of City Zone, MCD approached them in the office at about 2 p. m and told them that the wood work and partition being done in the office was contrary to law, since they had no permission. He was told by rakesh Sahni that no permission was required for getting old partition renovated. Mr. Jain told Mr. Rakesh Sahni to see him in his office on 16. 6. 80 with his father. This advice of Mr. Jain was ignored by Mr. Rakesh and his father as they considered that they were not doing something illegal. However, on next day, four five persons from city zone, MCD along with three constables came to their office and asked carpenters to stop the work. While leaving the office they took away implements of the carpenters. Sons of the complainant narrated entire event to him. Consequently, complainant along with his son rajesh Sahni went to MCD office at Minto Road and met Mr. Lal Singh Paul, accused, who was zonal engineer at that time and reported Mr. Jain"s conduct to him. Mr. Paul told the complainant to see Mr. Jain again. However, complainant could not find Mr. Jain on that date and again came to MCD Office on 17. 6. 80 to meet Mr. Jain. He talked to Mr. Jain and Mr. Jain told him that cabin and wooden partition were without sanction and he would get a case registered against them with the police. Accused deputed some members of the staff to go to the office of sons of the complainant to see and verify if work was still going on there. He asked the complainant to come to the office of zonal engineer (Building) where zonal engineer would be present and matter would be settled in his presence. Accused Mr Jain again visited 3482, Netaji Subhash marg and found that no work was in progress. Some tools of the carpenters were lying in the almirah, which he took away with him. Complainant along with his son went to MCD office at 2 p. m. where accused Mr. Jain and Mr. Paul were present. Accused Jain informed the complainant that he had already talked to accused Mr. Paul and in case complainant was ready to pay a sum of Rs. 5000/- as bribe, then matter regarding unauthorized partition would be closed and the tools and implements would be returned. This was told in presence of Mr. Paul. Complainant told Mr. Jain that the amount of Rs. 5000/- was too high, whereupon mr. Paul retorted that this was not a big amount and asked Mr. Jain to report a case against them to teach them a lesson and he left the office. Accused Mr. Jain told complainant that he would have remaining talks at complainant's Asaf ali Road Office. He accompanied complainant and his son to 4/14a, Asaf Ali Road office where he settled the matter in Rs. 3000/ -. He was told by the complainant, who wan unwilling to pay bribe that he was not having this much amount, he would be able to arrange by next date and he should come next date. e 18. 6. 80 to receive the money. The accused told them that he would come to collect the amount at Asaf Ali Road office between 10 AM -12 noon. The complainant, on next date at about 8. 40 a. m, went to the Anti Corruption Branch and lodged a complaint about the demand of bribe by Mr. Jain and his boss Mr. Paul. Statement of the complain

Click Here to Read the rest of this document