The court upheld that demand and acceptance of bribes under the Prevention of Corruption Act are distinct offences, allowing for separate convictions based on the same facts.

1. Heard.

2. This Criminal Appeal is preferred by the accused against the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 15-7-1996, made in CC No. 75 of 1991 of the learned I Additional District Judge - cum - Chief Judicial Magistrate, Krishnagiri.

3. The accused was working as a Revenue Inspector in Firka Taluk, Harur, during January to March, 1990. Concededly, the accused is a public servant.

4. The accused was charged for the offences punishable under S.7 and S.13(1)(d)(i) and (ii) read wth 13(3) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'), with reference to an alleged occurrence of having demanded and accepted bribe of Rs. 100/- from one Thiru K. Kannan (PW 1) as gratification other than legal remuneration for processing the application dated 13-2-1990 (Ext. P5) of PW 1 for issuing "Small Farmer Certificate" for obtaining electricity supply at free of cost.

5. 1. The events leading to the filing of this appeal, briefly stated, are that PW 1, who was in need of "Small Farmer Certificate" for obtaining supply of electricity at free of cost, approached the Village Administrative Officer, Harur Taluk, namely, N. Theerthagiri (PW 5) on 13-2-1990 and the said village Administrative Officer (PW 5) issued Chitta (Ext. P6), Adangal (Ext. P7) and "No Objection Certificate" (Ext. P8) certifying that PW 1 was the resident of H. Thottampatti village, was in possession of land to the extent of 0.50.0 hectare, and was entitled to claim the benefits of Small Farmers for supply of electricity at free of cost.
2. On 28-2-1990, PW 1 went to the Taluk Office, met the accused and requested him to issue "Small Farmer Certificate" by submitting Exts. P1 to P4 application forms, Ext. P5 requisition letter, Ext. P6 Chitta, Ext. P7 Adangal and Ext. P8 "No Objection Certificate". After receiving all the papers, the accused asked PW 1 to bring PW 5 to get a statement from PW 5 for grant of "Small Farmer Certificate". But, the accused demanded a sum of Rs. 100/- from PW 1 for issuing the said certificate. When PW 1 informed the accused that he did not have money, he was asked to get money for completing the work.
3. PW 1 was not willing to pay any bribe and approached the office of the Inspector of Police, Vigilance and Anti - Corruption Department, Dharamapuri (PW 9), with Rs. 100/- (MO 1 series) at about 9 a.m. on 5-3-1990 and lodged a complaint (Ext. P9), complaining the demand of bribe by the accused. Based on the said complaint, the Inspector of Police, Vigilance and Anti - Corruption Department, Dharmapuri, (PW 9) registered a F.I.R. on 5-3-1990 (Ext. P21).
4. After registering the F.I.R. (Ext. P21) the investigating officer (PW 9) prepared two trap witnesses, namely (i) K. Raghupathy (PW 2), who was working in the Municipal Office, Dharmapuri, and (ii) Sivakumar, who was working in Tamil Nadu Water Supply and Drainage Board, and introduced them to PW 1. Both the trap witnesses were also permitted to read the complaint (Ext. P9) filed by PW 1. Thereafter, PW 9 made preparations for trapping.
5. PW 9, received Rs. 100/- in Rupees ten denomination (MO 1 series) from PW 1, bearing numbers as detailed hereunder :
1) 54B 168243    6) 69R 786962 
2) 32G 568675    7) 83A 088942 
3) OC 557025 8) 18E 744080 
4) 18M 932456    9) 42T 535619 and 
5) 47N 466561 10) 59N 042394 
PW 9 showed the currencies (MO 1 series) to the trap witnesses. PW 9 took a glass of water, added chemical powder Sodium Carbonate powder) and asked the trap witnesses to immerse their fingers into the solution, and required them to observe that there was no change in the colour of the solution. Then, PW 9 dusted phenolphthalein powder on the currencies, required the trap witnesses (PW 2) to count the currencies an