1. The sole accused, in C.C. No. 26 of 2006 on the file of the learned IV Additional Sessions Judge, Chennai is the appellant herein. He stood charged for offences under Sections 7, 13(2) r/w. 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. By the judgment dated 06.07.2010, the trial court convicted the accused under Sections 7, 13(2) r/w. 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 5000/- with defaulting sentence for three months under sections 7, 13(2) r/w. 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Challenging the above said conviction and sentence, the appellant/accused is before this Court with this Criminal Appeal.

2. Based on the materials filed by the prosecution, the trial Court framed charges as mentioned in the first paragraph of the judgment and the accused denied the same. In order to prove its case, on the side of the prosecution, as many as 9 witnesses were examined and 13 documents were exhibited.

3. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is as follows:-

PW-2 Chandrasekar is working as a promotion executive in the company run by PW-4 Vasudevan. PW-4 is doing electrical contractor business and license for the above company required to be renewed every two years and the license issued to his company has expired in June 2005. For the purpose of renewal of the license, PW-2, on 18.7.2005, took 6 electric meters to the accused office for inspection. Thereafter on 19.07.2005, he paid necessary fees and meters were examined in respect of which Ex.P.2 certificate was also signed. Thereafter, when he went to the accused, who being Electric Inspector, to get his signature, the accused demanded Rs. 2000/- as bribe for signing in Ex.P.2. Immediately, PW-2 informed the same to PW-4. However, he had instructed PW-2 to go to the office of the accused the next day and try to get the signature from the accused. Again, when PW-2 went to the office of the accused on 20.07.2005, the accused again demanded Rs. 2000/-. Then PW-2 again informed PW-4 and he has instructed PW-2 to give a complaint. According to that, on 22.07.2005 at 11.30 a.m. PW-2 has lodged the complaint Ex.P.3 with PW-8, the Sub Inspector of Police.

4. After receipt of the complaint, PW-8 registered the First Information Report Ex.P.11 and invited PW-3 Chandramohan and one Rajendran to his office as shadow witnesses and explained the trap proceedings and prepared entrustment mahazar Ex.P.4. Thereafter, PW-2 and PW-3 went to the accused office at 3.15 p.m. and PW-8 and the team waited outside the office of the accused. PW-2 went to the accused office which is situated in the first floor and also introduced PW-3 as the supervisor of his company and the accused had asked Rs. 2000/-. Immediately, PW-2 paid Rs. 2000/- to the accused and he received it and kept it in his shirt pocket and thereafter signed in Ex.P.2 Test Report. Thereafter, he has called one Raghava Rao and paid Rs. 1000/- to him. Immediately, PW-2 came out and gave a signal to PW-8. PW-8 and the police team came inside and in the presence of PW-3, phenolphthalein test has been conducted in the hands of the accused and it was found to be positive. Thereafter, PW-8 has seized the tainted notes of Rs. 1000/- from the accused and another Rs. 1000/- from Raghava Rao and sample bottles of M.O.2, 3 and 4 were sealed in the presence of PW-3 and one Rajendran. M.O.7 shirt of the accused was also seized under Mahazar Ex.P.5 and PW-8 has drawn rough sketch in respect of the office of the accused. Thereafter, PW-8 arrested the accused at 5.30 p.m. and forwarded the properties to the court and he handed over the case records to PW-9, Inspector of Police.

5. PW-9, took the case for further investigation on 23.07.2005 and examined the witnesses and recorded their statements. Thereafter, he obtained sanction from PW-1 and recorded the statement of PW-1 and laid final report as against the accused on 17.02.2006 under se