The prosecution's overwhelming evidence of demand and acceptance of illegal gratification under the Prevention of Corruption Act led to the confirmation of the conviction and sentence.

The appeal is directed against the judgment of the Special Judge for CBI cases, Madurai made in C.C.No. 03 of 2005, dated 09.05.2007.

2. The appellant herein was the Sub-Inspector of Police, Railway Protection Force, Tanjore District during the relevant point of time. He was found guilty by the trial court for acceptance of Rs.10,000/- on 23.11.2004 from Muthukameswaran, S/o. Bose Nadar as illegal gratification other than legal remuneration.

3. The trial court after examining eleven witnesses on the side of the prosecution and two witnesses on the side of defence, analyzed the Exhibits P.1 to P.34 and Exhibits D.1 to D.5 and material objects M.O.1 to 9, held the accused/appellant guilty of offences under Section 7 and 13(1)(d) r/w. Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. He was convicted and sentenced to undergo 2 years imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.5000/- i/d to undergo six month Rigorous imprisonment for offence under section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and 2 years Rigorous Imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.5000/- i/d to undergo six months Rigorous Imprisonment for offence under Section 13(2) r/w.13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The period of sentence are ordered to run concurrently. Aggrieved by the above judgment of conviction and sentence, the present appeal is filed.

4. The brief facts of the case as spoken through the witnesses is as follows:

The accused, Sub-Inspector of Police, Railway Protection Force, Tanjore District along with two other constables of Railway Protection Force while on duty on 15.11.2004 arrested one Thangamani for having found in possession of railway property. The case was registered against Thangamani in Crime No. 10 of 2004 and the matter was under investigation by the accused.

5. Bose Nadar and his son Muthukameswaran (PW.2) were running a scrap iron shop at Sarboji Market, Keezhavasal, Tanjore. Bala @ Kamatchi (PW 3) was the staff under them. On 21.11.2004 (Sunday) at about 02.30 p.m. the accused had gone to the shop of Muthukameswaran (PW 2) enquired Bala @ Kamatchi (PW 3) and had informed P.W.2 over phone that he has come to take Bala @ Kamatchi (PW 3) to Railway Protection Force station in connection with railway property theft case. When PW2 informed that he has not received any railway properties and if he want, they can even search his shop but not take any of his staff to station. The accused told him to come and meet him in person. Immediately P.W.2 came to the shop from his house and met the accused and explained him that he has nothing to do with stolen railway property. He has not purchased any stolen railway property from Thangamani who was arrested by the accused in connection with railway property theft. At that time the accused has demanded illegal gratification of Rs.20,000/- for not implicating P.W.2 or his staff in the theft case registered against Thangamani. When P.W.2 pleaded his innocence, the accused had demanded first installment bribe money of Rs.10,000/- to be paid by Wednesday or else he has to face serious consequences. The accused has also given his cell number 94435 86907 to P.W.2 and instructed him to contact over phone on Wednesday to ascertain the place of meeting. On Tuesday the accused called P.W.2 over phone and threatened him that he has given time only till Wednesday, till now he has not paid the first installment bribe of Rs.10,000/-. If bribe not given, he will take severe action.

6. P.W.2 was not inclined to give bribe. He met the Deputy Superintendent of Police, CBI at his camp office at Tanjore and gave complaint. On receipt of the complaint (Ex.P.2) S.P.Sankar (P.W.9) took cognizance and proceeded with the investigation. Since the complaint reveals prima facie allegation against Elangovan, Sub-Inspector of Police, Railway Protection Force, Tanjore, endorsement to that effect was made by P.W.9 on the complaint. The said endorsement is exclusively marked as Ex.P.24. Being satisfied with the genuin