VIPIN SANGHI, J.

1. The present appeal is directed against the judgment dated 05.11.2008 delivered by the learned Special Judge, Tis Hazari in Corruption Case no. 131/98, by which the appellant was convicted for the offence punishable under section (u/s) 7 and u/s 13(2) read with section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (‘PC Act’). By the order on sentence dated 07.11.2008, the appellant was sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment (RI) for a period of two years along with a fine of Rs.20,000/.-, and in default of payment of the fine - Simple Imprisonment (SI) for three months u/s 7 of PC Act. For offences punishable under section 13(2) read with section 13(1)(d) of the PC Act, the appellant has been sentenced to undergo RI for two years along with a fine of Rs 20,000/-, and in default of payment of the said fine further SI for three months.

2. The case of the prosecution is that, vide FIR RC No. DAI-1998-A-0019/CBI/ACB/N.DELHI, (Ex.PW 7/A) a case was registered on 10.03.1998 against the appellant, Lower Division Clerk (LDC), Office of Controller of Programme, International Channel, Doordarshan, Mandi House, New Delhi on the written complaint (Ex.PW-5/A) of one Smt. Vinita Mohan R/o N-63, Ram Jagul Park, Laxmi Nagar, Delhi who was examined as PW 5.

3. In the complaint (Ex. PW-5/A), it was alleged that ‘Vin Communication’- a production unit of films was run by the complainant at Delhi. She was dealing with production of Television serials, corporate films and advertisements. The complainant allegedly contacted Dr. Nilima Harjal, Dy. Controller of Programme, International Channel, Doordarshan on 02.03.1998 for the purpose of getting her serial “Filmi Reporter” approved under the sponsored category. On contacting Dr. Harjal, she advised the complainant to contact the accused, who was working in her office, for getting further directions regarding the same. According to the complainant Dr. Nilima Harjal and the appellant Rajinder Singh demanded bribe for getting the complainants serial approved.

4. As the complainant was not willing to pay a bribe for her work, she made the written complaint (Ex. PW5/A) to the Superintendent of Police (SP), CBI, Anti-Corruption Branch (ACB), Delhi on 10.03.1998. The complaint, inter alia, records:

“I contacted Shri Rajinder Singh as desired by Dr. Nilima Harjal. Shri Rajinder Singh reiterated the version of Dr. Nilima Harjal and demanded an amount of Rs.10,000/- from me and further demanded that I would have to pay an amount of Rs.6,000/- per month to him. He further directed me to pay this amount on 10.03.98 in the afternoon and directed me to bring this amount along with the pilot episode cassette and synopsis of “Filmi Reporter”.

5. Inspector HS Karmayal (PW-7) was entrusted to lay the trap; he constituted the raiding party, which included CBI officials and two independent witnesses one Sh. Bhupesh Chander, Office Manager, MMTC, New Delhi (PW-6) and other Smt. Veena, Jr. Office Manager, MMTC (PW-2). Both the independent witnesses were shown a copy of the said complaint (Ex. PW5/A) dated 10.03.1998.

6. The complainant (PW- 5) was made to speak to Dr. Harjal from the CBI office at 1:10 PM, which was recorded on tape. Dr. Harjal asked the complainant about her proposal and told her to speak to Sh. Rajender. At 2:30 PM, the complainant was made to speak to the accused in the presence of the two independent witnesses. The accused repeated his demand and asked her to meet him after 4 PM on 10.03.1998. Thereafter, the complainant produced Rs. 7,000/- consisting of 14 GC notes of Rs 500/- denomination each; the numbers on the GC notes were recorded in the handing over memo (Ex. PW2/C). The said GC notes were treated with phenolphthalein powder. The witnesses were explained and demonstrated the reaction of phenolphthalein powder with colourless solution of Sodium Carbonate. The treated GC notes were handed over to the complainant and kept in a small leather ladies hand bag of the c