( 1. ) THIS appeal has been directed by the appellant against the judgment and order dated 29th August, 1992, passed by the Special Judge, Dewas, in Special Case No. 2/86 convicting the appellant for offence punishable under Section 5 (1) (d) read with Section 5 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) as also under Section 161, IPC and sentencing him Rigorous Imprisonment for six months on both counts and fine of Rs. 500/- in total Rs. 1000/- in both the counts, in default of payment of fine, further sentences of 3 months on each count. All the sentences were directed to run concurrently.

( 2. ) ACCORDING to the prosecution case, appellant was posted at double Chouky of Police Chouky District, Dewas on 28-11-1985 as Assistant Sub Inspector. He demanded Rs. 300/- rupees as bribe for releasing complainant Rajaram and his son Mohan on bail in connection with Crime No. 71/85 registered for the offence under Section 509, IPC. He obtained Rs. 100/- from complainant Rajaram being public servant and thereby committed offence punishable under Section 161, IPC and under Section 5 (1) (d)/5 (2) of the Act.

( 3. ) IT is alleged by the prosecution that complainant Rajaram does not want to pay any amount as illegal gratification for releasing himself and his son on bail, therefore, he went to the office of the Divisional Special Establishment of Police, Lok Ayukta, Indore and lodged a complaint (Exh. P-3) for taking action against the appellant. On this report, a trap was arranged against the appellant. After completion of preliminary formalities, to trap the appellant red handed, the trap party consisting complainant Rajaram (P. W. 2), Panchwitness, Deokaran (P. W. 5), Gazetted Officer B. L. Manik (P. W. 6), Rajnath Upadhyaya (P. W. 8), Constable Jagdish Chandra (not examined), Vithalrao (P. W. 3) and other constables proceeded for double Chouky on 28-11-1985 in Government jeep at about 1. 00 PM. They reached at the destination after 45 minutes. Complainant Rajaram (P. W. 2) and shadow witness Deokaran (P. W. 5) were sent to Police Chouky and rest members of the trap party were standing at a distance of the police chouky. It is, further, alleged by the prosecution that the complainant paid marked and powder treated currency note of Rs. 100/- to the appellant. On accepting the same by the appellant, the complainant as per the plan gave signal to the members of the trap party. The members of the trap party immediately entered inside the police chouky and caught hold of the hands of the appellant. The officers of the trap party disclosed their identity and asked the appellant about the said hundred rupee currency note, upon which the appellant disclosed that same was put by him in the pocket of his pant. B. L. Manik (P. W. 6) took out the said note and thereafter hands of the accused were washed in the solution of Sodium Carbonate, which turned pink. Some solution was preserved in a bottle and it was sealed. The appellant was arrested. After performance of other formalities as also usual investigation, challan was filed against the appellant before the Trial Court.

( 4. ) THE Special Judge, framed charges against the appellant for the offences punishable under Section 5 (1) (d)/section 5 (2) of the Act and under Section 161, IPC, which was denied by the appellant. According to the appellant, he was falsely implicated in the case by complainant Rajaram against whom the case was registered by him as also by Panchwitness Deokaran (P. W. 5), who was the accused for the offence under Section 379 and whose photograph was affixed in the police station as habitual offender. Deokaran (P. W. 5) was compelling him for removing his photograph for which he was not agreed. It is also contended by the appellant that Station House Officer Shyam Sundar Trivedi was keeping grudge against him and wanted to him to transfer from double Chouky police chouky and on his conspiracy the whole false case was concocted aga