Illegal Gratification - Unless the court is satisfied on the demand & acceptance of the bribe by the accused, it is difficult to hold that he accepted the illegal gratification.
Illegal Gratification - Evidence of the complainant in a case under the Prevention of Corruption Act is in no better position than an accomplice and as such the same could be accepted only if there was corroboration in material particulars.

T.P.S.Mann, J.

1. The appellant has filed the present appeal for challenging the judgment and order dated 5.10.2002 passed by Special Judge, Patiala, whereby he was convicted under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act and sentenced to undergo RI for two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/-. In default of payment of fine, he was ordered to undergo further RI for three months.

2. Facts giving rise to the case are that the appellant was posted as a Canal Patwari. Complainant Chander Bhan PW-4 used to share turn of canal water with Singh Ram and Teja Ram. He filed an application before the Ziledar for fixing of his turn of canal water. The applications moved by him were marked to the appellant, who demanded a sum of Rs. 1,000/- from him for making a report in favour of the complainant. The amount was finally settled at Rs. 700/-. The complainant talked to his cousin Sat Pal PW-5 regarding the demand of bribe made by the accused.

3. On 14.9.2000, complainant Chander Bhan along with his cousin Sat Pal went to the office of DSP (Vigilance), where he apprised the authorities regarding the demand of bribe made by the appellant. DSP Gurmukh Singh PW-7 recorded statement Ex. PE made by Chander Bhan, on the basis of which formal FIR No. 42 dated 14.9.2000 was registered at Police Station, Vigilance Bureau, Patiala under Sections 7 and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act (hereinafter referred to as the `Act). Complainant produced Rs. 700/- of the denomination of Rs. 100/- each before the DSP, who applied phenolphthalein powder on the currency notes. In the meantime, Satinder Singh Nanda and Gursharan Kaur Walia, who were posted as Research Officer and Assistant Director, respectively in Language Department, Patiala, came there. They were associated by DSP Gurmukh Singh in the proceedings. A demonstration was given regarding the effect of the phenolphthalein powder. The numbers of the currency notes were noted on a memo. Sat Pal PW-5 was instructed to act as a shadow witness for giving signal to the raiding party after the amount was accepted by the accused on demand.

4. Thereafter, the raiding party went to the house of the accused. Complainant Chander Bhan and his cousin Sat Pal entered the house of the accused, whereas the remaining members of the raiding party stayed behind. The accused asked the complainant, if he had brought the amount. Upon this, the complainant handed over the tainted currency notes of Rs. 700/- to the accused. On receipt of a signal from Sat Pal, the shadow witness, DSP Gurmukh Singh along with other members of the party arrived at the scene. The tainted money was recovered from underneath the leg of the accused. The number of the currency notes tallied with the numbers mentioned in the memo Ex. PF. These currency notes were taken into possession. The shirt of the accused was dipped in a solution of sodium carbonate prepared in a glass of water and the colour turned pink. The said solution was put in a nip and sealed and taken into possession. Shirt was also made a parcel and taken into possession. The hands of the accused were dipped in the glass of water containing Sodium Carbonate. This time again the colour turned pink. The solution was put in a nip and sealed. The applications Ex. PC and PD submitted by complainant Chander Bhan for allotment of turn of canal water were also recovered vide memo Ex. PM. The statements of the witnesses were recorded. After obtaining sanction Ex. PN, final report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. was submitted.

5. On appearance of the accused before the Court, he was supplied with documents attached with the challan. After hearing the accused and perusing the challan papers, Special Judge, Patiala framed charges against the appellant under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Act. The accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

6. In order to prove its case, the prosecution examined HC Gurbhej PW-1 and C. Paramjit Singh, PW-2, who proved their