This is an appeal by the Public Prosecutor against the order of the learned Magistrate discharging and acquitting the respondent at the close of the prosecution case on a charge under section 3(a)(ii) of the Prevention of Corruption Act 42/61.

In his ruling on January 15, 1982 the learned Magistrate found "the prosecution has failed to establish a prima facie case against the accused if unrebutted would warrant his conviction of the offence as per charge." He gave the grounds for his decision on a later date. It would appear from the grounds of decision the learned Magistrate has carefully considered the evidence adduced by the prosecution, in particular the testimony of the main prosecution witness, Chung Chi Han, and he came to this conclusion:

"In sum, my finding is that the accused did ask for the $112,800 and that he (accused) did tell PW2 that the $112,800 was for the paying the real property gains tax and for the income tax officers. But I find no circumstances, from which I can safely infer that the $112,800 was received on account of the income tax officers. That the prosecution must prove this, has been stated in the case of Mohd Kassim v Public Prosecutor [1