In an appeal against acquittal, the appellate court will not interfere unless the trial court's decision is perverse, as the accused enjoys a double presumption of innocence. Conviction for corruption requires clear proof of illegal demand and acceptance, which is negated by evidence of legitimate service charges.

ORAL JUDGMENT

1. The appeal is filed by the appellant State under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the judgement and order of acquittal passed by the learned Special Judge and Additional Sessions Judge, Kutch at Bhuj (hereinafter referred to as “the learned Trial Court”) in Special Case A.C.B. No. 115 of 2000 on 31.03.2010, whereby, the learned Trial Court has acquitted the respondent for the offence punishable under Sections 7, 13(1)(d) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as “the PC Act” for short).

1.1 The respondent is hereinafter referred to as “the accused” as he stood in the original case for the sake of convenience, clarity and brevity.

2. The brief facts that emerge from the record of the case are as under:

2.1 The accused was working as a Veterinary Officer in the Animal Welfare Centre of village Vekra (Rampur), Taluka Mandvi, District Kutch and was a public servant. The camel of the complainant - Kasambhai Musabhai Manjothi residing at Rampur Vekra village was sick and on 29.01.2000, the complainant went to the accused and asked him to come to visit the camel. The accused did not go on that day and on the next day, once again the complainant went to meet the accused and asked him to come for a visit. The accused told him that he wanted to go for a visit and thereafter, came to check the camel after his visit at village Ludhwa between 02.30 to 03.00 pm. After checking the camel, the accused told the complainant that he was not charging him any visit fee as he had gone for a visit but he would have to give Rs. 50/- for the two packets of medicine. The complainant did not have the money and told him that he would give the amount later on. On 01.02.2000, between 06.00 pm and 07.00 pm, the complainant met the accused and the accused inquired about the camel but the camel was still sick and at that time, the accused demanded for the illegal gratification of Rs. 50/- and stated that he would treat the camel only after the amount was paid. The complainant told the accused that he would come on the next day and as the complainant did not want to pay the amount of illegal gratification, he went to the ACB Police Station Kutch at Bhuj and filed a complaint before the Police Inspector, ACB Police Station, Kutch at Bhuj.

2.2 After recording the complaint of the complainant, the Trap Laying Officer called the panch witnesses and Police Constable Bhatt was called and the complainant gave Rs. 50/- which were one currency note of the denomination of Rs. 20/- and three currency notes of the denomination of Rs. 10/- each. Police Constable Bhatt explained the characteristics of anthracene powder and ultraviolet lamp to the complainant and the panch witnesses and conducted the demonstration of anthracene powder and ultraviolet lamp and after smearing all the currency notes with anthracene powder, placed the currency notes in the left shirt pocket of the complainant. The necessary instructions were given and the panchnama part 1 was drawn. The complainant, panch witnesses, Trap Laying Officer and members of the raiding party sat in vehicle number GJ-01-G-3552 and left for the Animal Welfare Centre and halted the vehicle at a distance away from the centre. The complainant and the shadow witness went walking to the Animal Welfare Centre and entered into the room where the accused was seated. In the presence of the panch witness, the accused deman