JUDGMENT:

K. Surender, J.

1. The appellant was convicted for the offences under sections 7 and 13(1)(d) r/w.13(2) of the Prevetion of Corruption Act, 1988, on the allegation of accepting bribe of Rs.1,000/-.

2. The appellant died during the course of pendency of the appeal and accordingly permission was sought by the legal heirs who are the wife and daughter to prosecute the appeal. Permission was granted.

3. The prosecution case is that the defacto complainant/PW1 was a motor mechanic. One A.Praveen used to give him a two wheeler for repair. However, the Inspector (not prosecuted) along with the appellant who was Constable went to PW.1’s mechanic shop of 19.04.2008 and informed that the two wheeler which was given by Praveen was stolen vehicle. An amount of Rs.1,500/- was taken from PW1 and the Inspector also threatened him saying that PW1 knew about the commission of theft of the vehicle. PW1 pleaded with the Inspector and the appellant saying that he does not know anything about the factum of theft of two wheeler by Praveen. The telephone numbers of the Inspector and the appellant were given to PW1 and asked him to appear in Police Station on 22.04.2008.

4. PW1 along with PW4 who