The court established principles regarding corroborative evidence in bribery cases, emphasizing the necessity for independent witness verification amidst claims of false implications.

1. This appeal is directed against impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 29-08-1997 passed by the Vth Additional Sessions Judge and Special Judge (C.B.I.) Jabalpur in Special Case No.20/1994, whereby the appellant has been held guilty of commission of offence under S.7, S.13(1)(d) read with S.13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (In short 'the Act') and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 2 year and fine of Rs.4,000/-, in default of payment of fine, additional R.I. for six months for commission of offence under S.7 of the Act and R.I. for 2 years with fine of Rs.4,000/-, in default, additional R.I. of six months for commission of offence under S.13(1)(d) read with S.13(2) of the Act. Both the sentences are directed to run concurrently.

2. The prosecution story, as unfolded from the records of the case and the impugned judgment, is that at the relevant time, the appellant was posted as Station Master at Bilaspur. The complainant - Govind Ram, PW - 7 submitted a complaint in Ex.P - 4 on 26-11-1993 in the office of D.S.P., CBI, in which, it was alleged that the appellant demanded bribe of Rs. 1,000/- stating that he will get a job of Khalasi arranged for him. The complaint was forwarded for enquiry to the Inspector, Vinay Kumar, PW - 6, who called independent witnesses V. K. Sharda, PW - 4 and Vikas Kapale, PW - 5 to verify the complaint. It is the case of the prosecution that the complainant in the presence of the independent witnesses stated regarding demand of bribe and submission of complaint, Ex.P - 4. Thereafter, pre - trap proceedings were drawn, wherein demonstration of reaction of phenolphthalein powder with sodium carbonate was given to the complainant in the presence of witnesses. The complainant produced currency notes, numbers of which, were noted down, phenolphthalein powder was smeared on it, then it was kept in the pocket of the complainant with instructions not to touch till demand is raised by the appellant and after giving money, signal be given. Pre - trap proceedings were reduced in writing under panchnama in Ex.P - 5. Further case of the prosecution is that thereafter, the complainant along with panch witnesses and Vinay Kumar, Inspector (CBI), PW - 6 proceeded to the office of the appellant. In the office, conversation took place regarding bribe for providing employment and thereafter, Rs. 1,000/- was given by the complainant - Govind Ram to the appellant which was accepted by the appellant and kept in his pocket. Further case of the prosecution is that soon thereafter, the trap team arrived and the appellant was caught red handed. Currency notes of Rs. 1,000/- were recovered from the possession of the appellant. The hands of the appellant, complainant as also the currency notes were washed in the solution of sodium carbonate, which turned pink. Hand wash were kept and sealed in bottles. Trap proceedings were reduced in writing in panchnama, Ex.P - 6 and thereafter, report was submitted in the office of S.P., CBI, upon which, FIR in Ex.P - 7 was registered. Seized articles including hand wash were sent for chemical analysis and forensic report in Ex.P - 8 was received, in which, phenolphthalein test of hand wash of the appellant and currency notes was found positive. Thereafter, sanction for prosecution in Ex.P - 3 was obtained from V. K. Rai, Divisional Operation Manager, PW - 3. Upon completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed in the Court of Special Judge and on the basis of material contained in the charge sheet, learned Special Judge framed charges against the appe