The court affirmed that the prosecution can establish corruption through credible witness testimonies and forensic evidence, applying legal presumptions in favor of finding the accused guilty.

1. This appeal is directed against judgment dated 1-1-1997 passed by First Additional Sessions Judge and Special Judge under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (henceforth 'the Act, 1988'), Bilaspur in Special Criminal Case No. 7/94. By the impugned judgment, accused / appellant Banshilal has been convicted under S.7 and S.13(1)(d) / 13(2) of the Act, 1988 and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for two months and rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for two months, respectively, with a direction to run the sentences concurrently.

2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is as under :
Appellant / accused Banshilal was posted as Patwari in Patwari Halka No. 16, Bagharra, Revenue Circle Kunda. Complainant Ramsanehi Sharma (PW 1) made a written complaint (Ex. P / 1) to Dy. Superintendent of Police, Lokayukta, Bilaspur that he had purchased 5 dismil land from Niranjan Singh Thakur and his father Gorelal Sharma had purchased 52 dismil land from Vedprasad and the documents including stamp papers (sale deeds) were given to the appellant for mutation in the name of complainant Ramsanehi Sharma (PW 1) and his father Gorelal Sharma. On 22-1-1992, the appellant demanded Rs. 1200/- for mutation of the land. Complainant Ramsanehi Sharma (PW 1) gave Rs. 500/- to the appellant and he told the appellant that he would give the balance amount after completion of the mutation proceedings. On 18-2-1992, complainant Ramsanehi Sharma (PW 1) went to the appellant. The appellant again made demand for remaining amount of Rs. 700/-. Since complainant Ramsanehi Sharma (PW 1) did not want to give the rest of the demanded money to the appellant, he made the written complaint (Ex.P / 1). The complaint (Ex.P / 1) was forwarded to Inspector Hemant Khare (PW 8) for necessary action. Assistant Statistical Officer Suresh Chandra Singh (PW 2), Assistant Veterinary Surgeon Dr. R. K. Maitra (PW 3) were called as panch witnesses.
The complaint (Ex.P / 1) was given to Panch Witnesses for their perusal. They inquired about the complaint (Ex.P / 1) from complaint Ramsanehi Sharma (PW 1). A pre - trap demonstration was arranged vide Ex.P / 2, wherein a solution of sodium carbonate was prepared in a glass. On dipping of a piece of plain paper in the solution, colour of the solution did not change. Thereafter, another piece of paper containing phenolphthalein powder was dipped in the solution, colour of the solution turned pink. After giving demonstration, complainant Ramsanehi Sharma (PW - 1) was asked to submit currency notes of Rs. 700/-. He submitted currency notes of Rs. 700/- in the denomination of Rs. 100/- each. Pre - Trap Panchnama (Ext. P2) was prepared and numbers of the currency notes were recorded therein and thereafter phenolphthalein powder was smeared on the currency notes and those currency notes were kept in the right pocket of the kurta worn by complainant Ramsanehi Sharma (PW - 1). He was informed and guided as to how the trap would be arranged and the role which he was required to play in the trap proceedings. Complainant Ramsanehi Sharma (PW - 1) was also instructed that he will give the money to the appellant only on his making demand.
After preparing Pre - Trap Panchnama (Ext. P2) and arranging pre - tap proceedings, the trap - team proceeded to the house of the appellant situated at Village Bagharra. Complai