JUDGMENT :

1. 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 21.01.2019, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-XI-cum-Special Judge, C.B.I., Dhanbad in R.C. No. 19(A)/2012-D whereby and where under, the learned court below has held the appellant-convict guilty for the offences punishable under Section 7 of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and 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 two years and to pay fine of Rs.50,000/- each separately for the offences punishable under Section 7 of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 as well as under Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and in case of failure to deposit the fine amount, the convict was further directed to undergo Simple Imprisonment for six months. It was ordered that both the sentences shall run concurrently.

3. The case of the prosecution in brief is that the complainant was a contractor who participated in the tender for his proprietary firm M/s. Sonu Enterprises. The tender was opened. The bid of the complainant was found to be the lowest one and the same was sent by the tender committee for approval. During the process, the concerned note-sheet was sent to the Civil Department. The appellant-convict being one of the member of the Tender Committee was to put his signature on the said note-sheet approving the tender to be awarded to the complainant and on 27.08.2012, the complainant went to the appellant-convict who was posted as Assistant Manager (Finance) and requested to put his signature on the tender file but the appellant-convict demanded a bribe of Rs.20,000/-. The complainant-Sugriw Singh (P.W.3) submitted a written application to the Superintendent of Police, C.B.I. on 27.08.2012. The matter was verified by P.W.5- Prasannjit Mukharjee, Sub-Inspector of Police, C.B.I. On the basis of verification report, FIR of this case was registered. A trap was laid. The appellant-convict was caught red handed while accepting the bribe amount. Sanction of prosecution was obtained. After completion of investigation, charge sheet for the offences punishable under Section 7 as well as Section 13 (2) read with Section 13 (1) (d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 was submitted against the appellant-convict. Separate charges were framed against the appellant-convict for having committed the offence on 28.08.2012 of demanding, accepting the illegal gratification of Rs.20,000/- punishable under Section 7 as well as Section 13 (2) read with Section 13 (1) (d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

4. In support of its case, the prosecution altogether examined 13 witnesses besides proving the relevant documents and material exhibits while one witness was examined on behalf of the defence.

5. Out of the 13 witnesses examined by the prosecution, P.W.3 –Sugriw Singh is the complainant himself. He has deposed that in the year 2012, a tender was floated by the Civil Department of East Jharia area of BCCL. After the tender was opened, the complainant was found the lowest bidder. The members of the Tender Committee were to sign on the file related to allocation of work. The appellant-convict was one of the member of the committee. The file went to the table of the appellant-convict. The complainant approached the appellant-convict as the file was remaining in the table of the appellant-convict. The appellant-convict demanded Rs.20,000/- as bribe to process the file of the complainant. The complainant did not want to pay the bribe. Hence, he submitted a written report to Superintendent of Police, C.B.I. on 27.08.2012. P.W.5 was sent along with the complainant to the office of the appellant-convict for verification of the complaint of the complainant but at that time, the appellant-convict was not available in his office. P.W