The accused in Special Case No. 11 of 1986 on the file of the Special Judge and Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tiruchirappalli is the appellant herein. He was charged for an offence punishable under S. 161, I.P.C. and also under S. 5(2) r/w. S. 5(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947.

2. The charge against him is that he demanded a sum of Rs. 300/- as illegal gratification or motive or reward on 21-8-85 at his residence at Karur from one M. Jagannathan for the purpose of recommending the issue of legal heirship certificate on the death of Palanisamy brother of the said Jagannathan to enable him to get the amount of Rs. 15,000/- deposited in the Karur Vysya Bank Limited, Karur in the name of his deceased brother Palanisamy and actually a sum of Rs. 100/- at the first instance and then directed the said Jagannathan to pay the balance of Rs. 200/- within a period of two weeks thereafter and the accused reiterated the demand again on 28-8-85 at Thottakurichi and on 1-9-85 at Karur at his residence he accepted a sum of Rs. 200/- from the said Jagannathan at his residence at Karur on 3-9-85 at 7.30 hours.

3. The second charge against him is that he being a Public Servant by abuse of his official position as such obtained pecuniary advantage of Rs. 100/- on 21-8-85 and the balance of Rs. 200/- on 3-9-85 from the said Jagannathan and thereby committed a criminal misconduct in the discharge of his official duty and thereby committed an offence under S. 5(2) r/w. S. 5(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act.

4. The prosecution has examined P.Ws. 1 to 8 and market Exs. P-1 to P-18 and M.Os. 1 to 5. The accused has not examined any defence witness on his side.

5. The accused is the revenue Inspector in Karur taluk office. P.W. 1 Jagannathan approached the Tahsildar for the issue of a legal heirship certificate and filed an application for that purpose under Ex. P3 on 20-8-1985. It seems that the Tahsildar told P.W. 1 that he had forwarded the application to the accused for the purpose of verification in the village. Thereafter P.W. 1 Jagannathan approached the accused for that purpose and accused had demanded him to pay a sum of Rs. 300/- for that purpose by way of bribe. P.W. 1 Jagannathan told that he had no money and ultimately he could pay a sum of Rs. 100/- on 21-8-85 and agreed to pay the balance of Rs. 200/- subsequently. It is the case of the prosecution that P.W. 1 had approached the accused on more than one occasion for getting the report from the accused. Finally, P.W. 1 had agreed to pay the balance of Rs. 200/- to the accused and returned. After coming back P.W. 1 thought of trapping the accused, and P.W. 1 was not willing to pay the balance of Rs. 200/-. So he went to the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Department, Tiruchirappalli on 2-9-85 with an application prepared by him already. Ex. P3 is the said application prepared by him already. Ex. P3 is the said application. Then P.W. 8 Inspector of Police sent for two officers viz. Somasundaram and Gunasekaran, Engineer and clerk respectively for the purpose of the trap. The Inspector P.W. 8 demonstrated the significance of the trap to the witnesses and also to P.W. 1 and accordingly, all to them went to Karur in a car. It is also the case of P.W. 1 that he had paid a sum of Rs. 200/- to the accused in the presence of P.W. 2. Then the Inspector of Police seized the currency notes from the accused under the Mahazar and the accused was subsequently arrested. The suggestion of the accused P.W. 1 is that P.W. 1 wanted to pay a sum of Rs. 200/- towards Flag Day Fund and accordingly P.W. 1 came and paid to him. The case of the accused is that he did not demand any money from P.W. 1 nor had he received a sum of Rs. 200/- from P.W. 1 towards bribe.

6. P.W. 2 Gunasekaran is clerk in the Public Works Department at Trichy and he is the official trap witness. His evidence is that he accompanied P.W. 1 to the house of the accused and there the accused asked him as to whethe