JUDGMENT :

Heard the parties through video conferencing.

2. The appellant has preferred this appeal being aggrieved by the Judgment of conviction and Order of sentence dated 21.12.2018, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-XIV-cum-Special Judge, Vigilance (Anti-Corruption Bureau), Hazaribagh in Special Case No. 11 of 2012 whereby and where under the learned court below has held the appellant-accused guilty for the offences punishable under Section 7 as well as under Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and sentenced him to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of one year and fine of Rs.500/- and in case of default of payment of fine to undergo Simple Imprisonment for a period of one month for the offence punishable under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. For the offence punishable under Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, the appellant-accused has been sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of two years and fine of Rs.1,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo Simple Imprisonment for a period of one and a half months. It was ordered that both the sentences shall run concurrently.

3. The case of the prosecution in brief is that the complainant (P.W.6) –Rekha Devi was an Angan Bari Sewika-cum-Contractor for Building Construction of Angan Bari Centre and the appellant-accused, on the date of occurrence was posted as an Assistant in Block Office, Padma. The complainant alleged that the appellant-accused was demanding Rs.4000/- for part payment for completing the process of her file related to the said Angan Bari Centre as bribe. After several requests being made by the complainant, the appellant-accused agreed to complete the work upon receiving the bribe of Rs.1,500/- but as the complainant does not want to pay the bribe, she approached the Superintendent of Police, Vigilance Bureau, Ranchi. Mr. Awadhesh Kumar Singh verified the allegations made by the complainant in her complaint against the appellant-accused on 04.06.2012. Upon the complaint being found to be true, the F.I.R. of this case was registered. A trap was laid and thereafter the appellant-accused was caught red handed while accepting the bribe amount of Rs.1,500/- and upon his hand being washed with sodium carbonate solution, the colour of the solution turned pink. Charge sheet in the case was submitted after completion of the investigation. Charges for the offences punishable under Section 7 as well as under Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 were framed against the appellant-accused for the occurrence which took place on 06.06.2012. The appellant-accused pleaded not guilty to the charges and he was put to trial.

4. In support of its case, the prosecution altogether examined 9 witnesses besides proving the relevant documents which has been marked exhibits.

5. Out of the 9 witnesses examined by the prosecution, P.W.6 –Rekha Devi is the complainant of the case. She identified the complaint submitted by her with the Superintendent of Police, Vigilance Bureau, Ranchi and also identified her signature over the G.C. Note Memorandum. She denied having submitted the complaint against the appellant-accused and submitted that her signature is only appearing on the said application. She further stated that nothing happened with her nor she stated anything before the I.O. At this stage she was declared hostile and even though the prosecution put leading questions to her still she did not support the case of the prosecution. She did not identify the appellant-accused in Court. In her cross-examination, she stated that she never met the appellant-accused and she does not know, where the appellant-accused worked. She further stated that she did not read the contents of the papers upon which she put her signature nor the contents of the same were read over to her. She has further stated that she was told that he