JUDGMENT :

AJIT SINGH, J.

1. Heard the learned counsel for appellant, learned AGA appearing for the State and perused the record of this case.

2. The prosecution story of this in brief is that on 20th June, 1978 one Suraj Mal moved a complaint against the present accused appellant Ram Kumar in writing (Ext.Ka-13) before the Superintendent of Police (Vigilance), Meerut. It was mentioned in the said complaint that the accused appellant posted as operator at the public tube-well No. 52 H.G. in village Dehpa was habitual of accepting bribes from the farmers to irrigate their fields. Complainant's sugar cane (perhi) field measuring six bighas was not irrigated and it went dry. The tube well operator, the present accused appellant, was demanding Rs. 60/- as bribe from the complainant and the complainant gave the currency notes to the accused appellant who kept the same in his pocket after its verification and counting.

3. Further prosecution case is that the members of the trap party overheard the conversation going on in between the complainant and accused appellant. Inspector Chawala and and his other companions entered the Gher and the accused was surrounded. Mr. Chawala, after disclosing