In corruption cases, the prosecution must prove the demand for illegal gratification beyond reasonable doubt; mere recovery of money without established demand is insufficient to sustain a conviction, particularly when the accused enjoys a double presumption of innocence following an acquittal.

CRL.A. IS FILED U/S.378(1) AND (3) CR.P.C BY THE SPL.P.P. FOR THE STATE PRAYING TO GRANT LEAVE TO APPEAL AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT OF ACQUITTAL DATED 17.6.2013 PASSED BY THE DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, CHAMARAJANAGAR DIST. IN SPL. CASE NO.158/2009 - ACQUITTING THE RESPONDENT/ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 7, 13(1)(d)(ii) R/W SEC.13(2) OF THE PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION ACT, 1988.

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL

ORAL JUDGMENT

This appeal is by the State represented by Lokayukta Police, being aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 17.06.2013 passed in Special Case no.158/2009 on the file of the District and Sessions Judge at Chamarajanagar, by which the Trial Court had acquitted the respondent - accused for the offences punishable under Sections 7, 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 ('Act', for brevity).

Brief facts of the case of the prosecution are that the complainant, P.W.1, namely, A.V.Channiyappan had apparently approached the respondent - accused, who was a Taluk Surveyor, then working in the Survey Department in the Office of the Tahsildar, Gundlupet, requesting him to have his land measuring 3 acres 28 guntas bearing Sy.No.23/2 situated at Managalli village, Gundlupete Taluk, surveyed and to have the encroachment by the neighbours removed enabling him to have the ingress and aggress and to carry his agricultural produce. That the accused went on postponing the same. Finally the accused had informed him that it was difficult to have the land surveyed as the neighbours would create galata and had instructed the complainant to seek police help. Accordingly, complainant had given a complaint to Gundlupet police and had taken the police protection for the purpose of surveying the land. Though the police had come near the land, the accused did not measure the land and expressed his inability to do same. The accused had asked the complainant to approach the Civil Court assuring that he would furnish a sketch copy.

That on 28.02.2008 complainant went to the office of the accused and requested him to furnish a survey sketch to which he demanded a sum of Rs.2,000/-, the complainant informed the accused that he would bring cash on the next day and would give it to him. That on the very same day evening, he went to Lokayukta office, Chamarajanagar, where Lokayukta Police Inspector - P.W.4 (C.W.18) was present, on complainant explaining the event that transpired between him and accused, P.W.4 - Police Inspector, asked him to come to office on the next day with the cash of Rs.2,000/-, that on confirmation of the demand for bribe made by the accused, on the following day on 29.02.2008 at about 7.15 a.m., the complainant went to the office of Lokayuktha police, Chamarajanagar, and lodged a written complaint through a person.

P.W.4 secured one Lingaraju - P.W.2 and one Marimuthu-P.W.3 to the office of Lokayuktha. That the complainant had handed over cash of Rs.2,000/- of denomination of Rs.500/- notes to P.W.4-Police Inspector. P.W.4 introduced P.Ws.2 and 3 to the complainant that they would be accompanying him to Gundlupet. Thereafter P.W.4 gave the said notes to P.Ws.2 and 3 and dictated currency notes number and P.W.2 recorded the said numbers. Some powder was smeared on the said notes and thereafter P.W.2 kept the said currency notes in the shirt pocket of the complainant and told him not to touch the said currency notes and to go to the accused office and if the accused demands payment of the bribe to hand over the said amount. He was further instructed if the accused accepted the bribe amount to give a signal by wiping his hair.

That about 9.15 a.m., complainant along with P.Ws.2 to 4 and his other staff went in a jeep to Gundlupet, complainant along with P.W.3, as instructed, went inside the office of accused at about 10.30 to 10.45 a.m., there were many persons standing near the accused, as s