Embargo of the Section not applicable in such records.

Some students of the Engineering College, Trivandrum, were lured into paying gratification money to the Examiner for giving them pass marks, but the bribe receivers were caught red-handed by the Vigilance Officers. This is the gist of the case in which three accused were convicted and sentenced to different terms of imprisonment and fine. These appeals are in challenge of the said conviction and sentence.

2. The examination (called Survey Practical Examination) was held on 24-11.1983 for which the second accused was the “External Examiner” and the third accused was the “Internal Examiner”. Some of the participants in the examination were appearing for the third chance in the examination and a failure this time would have resulted in loosing one year in their academic course. For such students, the examination held on 24.11.1983 was termed as “critical examination”. The second accused was at the relevant time, working on the deputation as Controller of Examinations in Gandhiji University and the third accused was then working as Assistant Professor of Civil Department in the Engineering College, Trivandrum. Altogether twenty students appeared for the practical examination, but only three of them secured pass marks. The prosecution case can now be narrated in the aforesaid background.

3. P.W.1 a student in the Vth Semester came to know that the second accused would add up marks to those who approach him with money and that the first accused would act as go-between. (First accused was the second grade skilled Assistant of the Engineering College). Other students who were anxious to have more marks also had the same information. A few among them met the third accused for advice, but he told them that the only way to get out of the situation was to meet the second accused who is “a money minded man”. Taking the cue from the third accused, those students decided to approach the second accused. The guardians of some of them directly approached the second accused and paid him rupees one thousand each. Some of the students used the services of the first accused to hand over the cash to the Examiner. P.Ws.1 and 4 were classmates who did the survey practical examination. They ventured to elicit from the second accused the result of the examination. But the second accused declined to divulge the results to them but them that they had sufficient time to “co-operate”. However, they collected information from the first accused that P.W.4 was among the failed candidates. First accused gave them sufficient hint that if the amount demanded was paid to him, the second accused would do the needful. Third accused advised them to act in the same way as the other students did.

4. The crucial events happened on the following two days. P.W.1 met the first accused during eveningon 7.12.1983 in front of Arts College, Trivandrum and handed over Rs.500. With that money the first accused, in the company of P.W.1 and another friend (P.W.5) proceeded to the second accused's residence. First accused, who alone went inside the house, reported to P.W.1 later that the cash was paid to the second accused. However, the first accused told them that the balance must be paid at least on the next day. P.W.1 was then convinced that the second accused receives money to add more marks to the losers. The idea then occurred to him that the Vigilance Officers should be informed about it. On the next day, P.W.1 went to the Vigilance Office and gave a statement to the Dy. S.P. (Ext.P1). He mentioned the numbers of currency notes already given to the second accused and also the numbers of the five other hundred rupees notes which he proposed to give to the first accused to be passed on to the second accused. The Dy. S.P. wanted to arrange a trap to catch the bribe receivers. On his request the District Collector deputed two responsible officers as witnesses for the trap. Phenolphthalein powder was smeared on the currency notes. Thereafter, P.W.1 accompanied by P.W.2 proc