1. Scar of conviction for offences, involving moral turpitude, has led first appellant, public servant, and indictment for offence of criminal conspiracy has prompted the second appellant, an individual, to invoke in unison appellate jurisdiction of this Court, enshrined under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, ‘Cr.P.C.’). The Sessions Judge, ACD Cases, Jodhpur, by impugned judgment dated 01.11.2007, indicted the first appellant for offence under Section 7, 13(1)(d) r/w 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (for short, ‘PC Act’) and for offence under Section 120-B IPC whereas indicted second appellant for offence under Section 120-B IPC and handed down following concurrent sentences with fine of different denominations.

First Appellant Bhagirath Ram:

Offence	Sentence	Fine	In default
7 PC Act	1 Year R.I.	Rs.5,000/-	1 month S.I.
13(1)(d),(2) PC Act	2 Years R.I.	Rs.5,000/-	2 months S.I.

Second Appellant Rameshwarlal:

2. Succinctly stated, the prosecution story, as unfurled from FIR, is that complainant Bhawani Singh (PW11) submitted a written report Ex.P-32 before ACB Outpost, Nagaur on 18.06.2002. In the report, complainant inter-alia alleged that he is opening Primary School at his village, and therefore, for seeking its registration, he submitted a file in the office of Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Nagaur. As per report, complainant met first appellant, an employee of that office, on 18.06.2002 at 11 AM, then he demanded Rs.4,300 for the accomplishment of work upto higher level. It further transpired from the report that first appellant warned complainant not to place the file before higher authority without payment of requisite amount. The complainant, while showing his reluctance to pay illegal gratification, solicited appropriate action of trapping first appellant red-handed.

3. On the basis of report Ex.P/32, Inspector-Devanand (PW13) arranged trap and recovered Rs.4,300/- from the possession of second appellant-Rameshwar. The trap proceedings followed by arrest of both the appellants, preparation of recovery memo and other relevant documents. Later on, both the appellants were released on bail.

4. During the course of investigation, ACB recorded statements of witnesses, obtained relevant documents and sent articles for FSL examination to procure report Ex.P-44. Thereafter, prosecution sanction Ex.P-28 was obtained against first appellant. In due course of time, investigation completed and the accused first appellant was charge-sheeted for offence under Section 7, 13(1)(d) r/w 13(2) of the PC Act while accused second respondent was charge-sheeted for offence under Section 120-B IPC. The learned trial Court framed charges against appellants and on their denial, they were put on trial.

5. Prosecution examined 14 witnesses during trial including the complainant and exhibited documents Ex.P-1 to Ex.P-45 respectively. Closure of prosecution evidence followed by recording statements of accused-appellants under Section 313 Cr.P.C. In his statement accused-appellant Bhagirath specifically denied demanding bribe from complainant Bhawani Singh and also repudiated insinuation of giving amount of gratification to second appellant Rameshwar. Likewise, Rameshwar–second appellant also stated with precision about not meeting first appellant Bhagirath on that day. He further clarified that Bhagirath never asked him to accept amount from the complainant. Besides that, some other facts were also disclosed by second appellant to repudiate the prosecution story with a positive assertion of his false implication in the matter.

6. The accused-appellants, thereafter, entered into their defence and examined one witness DW1 Kumbharam. Learned trial Court then proceeded