The demand and acceptance of bribe can be proved by circumstantial evidence, and the testimony of a hostile witness can still be considered if it corroborates the prosecution's version.

1. The present appeal has been preferred against the judgment dated 17.12.2004 passed by the learned Special Judge, Amritsar vide which the accused-appellant Narinder Singh has been held guilty and convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 7 and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act 1988 (herein-after called the Act) and the order on quantum of sentence of the even date, vide which the appellant has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years and to pay a fine of ` 1000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month, for the offence punishable under Section 7 of the Act. He was further sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years and to pay a fine of ` 1000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one month, for the offence punishable under Section 13(2) of the Act. The aforesaid sentences were ordered to run concurrently. The facts giving rise to this prosecution are that PW 2 complainant Jai Gobind Khurana reported to PW 9 Inspector Pinder Singh at the Office of Vigilance Bureau, Amritsar on 05.12.1992 and made his statement Ex. PD to the effect that he is working as an approved contractor of P.W.D. (B & R), Amritsar. During the year 1989-90, he had taken contract of construction of culverts from link road of village Gazal to Bhangala, District Amritsar. The work was carried out by him under the supervision of the accused Narinder Singh who was working as Junior Engineer. The complainant was also allotted another work for the construction of link road from Amritsar, Bhikhiwind, Khemkaran Road (ABK Road) to Khem Karan. The said work was carried out in the year 1990 under the supervision of the accused. The complainant has not received the payment for the works carried out and he entered into correspondence with the concerned officers. On 04.12.1992, complainant Jai Gobind along with Manohar Lal, contractor, met the accused at his house at Tarn Taran and requested him for the release of the payment for the work done by him. Accused told that he would complete all the formalities himself with regard to the payments after getting the same completed from the concerned officer and the payments shall be released to him. Accused demanded a sum of` 500/- as bribe for doing the job. The complainant and Manohar Lal made requests to the accused but he was adamant to his demand of ` 500/- as bribe. The complainant made an excuse that he was not having money with him at that time and made a false promise to pay the bribe. The accused told him that he had to go to Valtoha on 05.12.1992 and asked the complainant to bring the bribe amount at Valtoha.

2. The complainant produced five currency notes of the denomination of ` 100/- each before Inspector Pinder Singh. PW 1 Hardip Singh was associated in the raiding party. Inspector Pinder Singh put his initials on the currency notes and smeared the said currency notes with phenolphthalein powder. The tainted currency notes were handed over to the complainant with a direction to hand over the same to the accused on demand and not to shake hands with him. PW 1 Hardip Singh was deputed as a shadow witness and was instructed to accompany the complainant and overhear the conversation between the complainant and the accused and to have a watch on the passing over of the bribe money. He was instructed to flash a signal to the raiding party by putting his hand over his head after passing of bribe money. Gurdev Singh, Executive Magistrate was also joined in the raiding party. The raiding party left for Valtoha. On reaching the Chowk at Valtoha, the complainant and shadow witness were sent to the accused, while the remaining members of the raiding party took the scattered position. On receipt of the settled signal from the shadow witness, the trap laying officer along with the members of the raiding party went near the accused. The ac