JUDGMENT M.P. Varma, J. Accused Laxmi Narain has appealed to this Court against his conviction on charges under section 161 of the Indian Penal Code and also under section 5(2)/5(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, (hereinafter referred to as 'the act') for having accepted Rs. 50/- as bribe. He has been sentenced to suffer simple imprisonment for two years under section 161 of the Indian Penal Code and another term of two years under section 5(1)(d) of the Act, and also to pay a fine of Rs. 50/- in default thereof, to suffer another term of three months. 2. The case against him for the corruption charges arose on a petition of complaint dated 21.9.79 made by P.W. 5 Darbari Paswan alleging therein that the appellant, as a Station Superintendent at Railway station Darbhanga junction demanded bribe of Rs. 50/- for giving him employment to work as a casual labour either in leave vacancy or in absence of permanent staff. According to prosecution a list is maintained of such casual workers and the substitute is engaged for working temporarily in such contingency of leave vacancy or due to absence of permanent staff on duty. The name of Darbari Paswan was on the list and he has claimed that he approached the accused-appellant to put him on several occasions, but the accused was not prepared to oblige him by providing any such job unless he paid him a sum of Rs. 50/- as gratification. Darbari Paswan being unwilling to make such payment, made complaint to the Superintendent of police, Central Bureau of Investigation at Patna on 21.9.77. On receipt of the complaint the Police Inspector of the C.B.I.R.C. Choudhary (P.W.3) was asked to submit his report with respect to the allegation of the alleged bribe, demanded by the appellant. According to the prosecution, it was again on 28.9.79 that Darbari Paswan met Laxmi Narain Mahto and asked him to allot some work and it is stated that the accused repeated his demand of Rs. 50/- in presence of P.W. 3 (R.C. Choudhary) whereupon this witness submitted his verification report to the S.P.C.B.I. the report is exhibit 6. P.W. 3 said in this report that the allegation of Darbari Paswan appeared to he true. 50/- in presence of P.W. 3 (R.C. Choudhary) whereupon this witness submitted his verification report to the S.P.C.B.I. the report is exhibit 6. P.W. 3 said in this report that the allegation of Darbari Paswan appeared to he true. A formal F.I.R. was drawn up and case of demand of illegal grantification was registered and P.W. 10 another Inspector of the Department named N.C. Jha was asked to investigate into the case. The Inspector (P.W. 10) in order to lay a trap, organised a party consisting of P.W. 3 R.C. Choudhary, P.W. 8 B.N. Jha, another Inspector of the Department, P.W. 9 Gurban Kumar, P.W. 13 D.B. Singh, two constables, P.W. 2 Siasaran Singh and P.W. 4 Kailash Singh were also taken in the party. The Inspector (P.W.10) further sought the services of P.W. 7 Satyendra Pd. Singh a junior Engineer in the Telephone Department at Darbhanga and P.W. 12 K.P. Verma an Inspector of the Income-tax Department. These two witnesses were also included in the raiding party to witness the drama of laying the trap as independent spectators. A prior requisition was given by P.W. 10 to the Department concerned, i.e. to the Telephone Department and also to the Income tax Department to obtain their services for the purpose and they were deputed by their respective Departments. 3. The party came to Laheriasarai Dak Bungalow on 27.9.77. The complainant P.W. 15 Darbari Paswan was also invited there in the Dak Bangalow and he was introduced to every member of the raiding party. Darbari Paswan brought out 5 government currency notes, "each one of Rs. 10/- denomination, which was paid to the accused appellant in his chamber at the Railway station in presence of the trap witnesses and was subsequently recovered from appellant's possession. The notes were produced in court as material exhibit III/4. 4. The case of the prosecution is that when the raiding party assembled at the Dak bungalow a practical demonstration was conducted there. The currency notes were besmeared with phenol powder. A solution of &odium carbonate was also prepared in a glass of water. The phenol powder was applied to a piece of paper. One of the witnesses P.W.12 K.P. Varma was asked to touch the paper, which was tainted with phenol powder and thereafter his fingures were dipped in the solution and according to the prosecution, the solution turned pink in colour. The phenol powder was applied to a piece of paper. One of the witnesses P.W.12 K.P. Varma was asked to touch the paper, which was tainted with phenol powder and thereafter his fingures were dipped in the solution and according to the prosecution, the solution turned pink in colour. The coloured solution was kept in a different file (marked Ext. I), separately sealed and signed. The tainted G.C. notes were then made over to Darbari Paswan and necessary instruction was given to him to pass on these notes to the .accused-appellant as bribe and the plan of action to be taken was explained to each member of the raiding party. P.W. 7 was asked to remain close to the decoy P.W. 5. Darbari Paswan and he was further asked to give a signal, the moment the transaction was completed and all others were directed to rush in to catch hold of the accused on receipt of the signal. 5. The Prosecution further claims that every member of the raiding party was then asked to clean their hands with soap and water just to ensure that the signs of powder be totally washed off and a memorandum of the demonstration done in the Dak Bungalow was prepared (Ext. 4). 6. The party then reached Darbhanga railway station at about 4.15 P.M. It was about five minutes past 5 P.M. that P.W. 5 Darbari Paswan went to the accused in his chamber and made request to provide him with some job. It is said that at this stage once again, the accused uttered that unless Darbari Paswan paid him Rs. 50/- he would not give him any employment. Darbari paswan took out immediately those G.C. notes and banded them over to the accused. According to the prosecution the accused took the notes in his right hand and then counted the notes with the help of fingers of both his hands and thereafter kept them in the left drawer of the table. Other members of the party were all standing nearby as per arranged instructions given by P.W. 10. P.W. 7 gave the signal. Members of the party ran inside. P.W. 10 immediately disclosed his identity. He fell upon the accused and charged him for accepting a sum of Rs. 50/- as illegal gratification from P.W. 5 Darbari Paswan and that the notes were kept in the drawer of the table. P.W. 7 gave the signal. Members of the party ran inside. P.W. 10 immediately disclosed his identity. He fell upon the accused and charged him for accepting a sum of Rs. 50/- as illegal gratification from P.W. 5 Darbari Paswan and that the notes were kept in the drawer of the table. The appellant was asked to take out the tainted money which he meekly obeyed and brought out the G.C. notes from the drawer. The notes were taken charge of by the I.O. P.W. 10 and a seizure list was prepared in presence of P.W. 7 and P.W. 12. The sodium carbonate solution was prepared in two glasses and appellant was asked to put his fingers in those two glasses and the solution of the two glasses got pink in colour. The accused-appellant was taken into custody. P.W. 10 submitted charge sheet against him for acceptance of illegal gratification to show favour to P.W. 5 Darbari Paswan for providing him temporary employment as a casual labour. 7. At the trial stage it was pleaded in defence by the accused-appellant that one Tula Krishna Jha is a relation of P.W. 3 R.C. Choudhary, S.I. C.B.I. Tula Krishna Jha had fought election, in which the appellant in the village had acted against the interest of Tula Krishna Jha and this Tula Krishna Jha in collusion with P.W. 3 got him entangled in this case. Incidentally, it was also pleaded that casual labours get job easily and there was no circumstance, to raise the anger of Darbari Paswan so high, unless he was provoked to come out as a leader and that it was just a conspiracy led by P.W. 3 to hatch up a plan in pursuance of which a trap was led to get him prosecuted. 8. Prosecution evidence tendered in the court below may be classified in two categories. The witnesses, who have given evidence on the point of 'give and take' of the amount may be put in the first category, and the facts emerging out from the circumstantial evidence, such as, the tact of treating the G.C. notes with the chemicals and preparation of the solution, dipping fingers of the appellant causing the solution getting pink etc. may be put in the second category. may be put in the second category. P.W. 5, the decoy Darbari Paswan, P.W. 7 S.P. Singh, the Telephone Inspector and the two police officers of the C.B.I. P.W. 8 B.N. Jha and P.W. 10 N.C. Jha of the C.B.I. are the witnesses of the first category as they ale said to have seen and given evidence on the point of 'demand and acceptance' of the bribe-money by the accused-appellant. Other persons P.W. 3 Ram Chandra Choudhary, P.W. 9 Gulshan Kumar and P.W. 12 K.P. Verma are the witnesses of the second category, who have given statements directly on the point of recovery of the money and also the solution getting pink, when the fingers of the appellant of his both hands were dipped into the two solutions, prepared in two glasses. 9. There is another set of witnesses, who have come to prove the sanction order for the prosecution of this appellant. 10. The case is that the complainant P.W. 2 Darbari Paswan was on the roster of casual labourers, but at the relevant time be was without work. It was the exclusive jurisdiction of the station Superintendent that is the appellant to provide work to the waiting labourers on the list of causal workers and that Darbari Paswan was pleading before the appellant to assign work to him. The complaint of Darbari Paswan is that the appellant refused to show any favour unless a sum of Rs 50/- was paid to him. 11. On consideration of the statements of the witnesses examined on behalf of the prosecution, it may be said that there is no evidence on the fact of actual 'give and take' of the bribe-money of any independent witness. It is true that the necessity for a court to search for an independent witness in a case of charge for corruption is greater. It is equally true that such a crime is com. mitted in secrecy and difficulty may arise in getting independent witness to speak that such dirty transaction passed on and was completed in his presence. It is true that the necessity for a court to search for an independent witness in a case of charge for corruption is greater. It is equally true that such a crime is com. mitted in secrecy and difficulty may arise in getting independent witness to speak that such dirty transaction passed on and was completed in his presence. But in a case of trap, it cannot be denied that an accused is lured and goaded in some form to accept the bribe-money and in such a situation the absence of an independent witness, may cause 8 good deal of doubt in the mind of the court and the statements of trappers must be viewed with all cautions as the trappers come with a determined moto and under the hope of getting reward in case of success. 12. So far the instant case in concerned, the prosecution has made an attempt to fill up this lacuna by examining P.W. 7 and 12 as independent persons to witness the drama stated by the officers of the C.B.I. and passing of the tainted money to the appellant. To my mind, these two witnesses cannot exactly be termed to be independent persons. The independent witness, obviously is a person, who has no partisan-attitude. He has no motivated axe to grind. He must Act, independently and depose in court, without interest for presenting the truth of the occurrence (facts) witnessed by him literally. But in this case according to prosecution, there was a pre-plan to bribe the appellant in his office at the Railway platform. Therefore, there could have been no difficulty nor any paucity in getting independent persons at the platform, rather passengers, travellers and many others could have been easily available in plenty and anyone of them could have been picked up by the raiding party to witness the scene and evidence of such person could have lent some credibility with regard to the competency of the prosecution-version. But the prosecution chose P.W. 7 Satya Narayan and P.W. 12 K.P. Verma to press into service. They were requisitioned at the behest of P.W. 10 and they moved in the company of P.W. 5 and other police officers who arranged to lay a trap. But the prosecution chose P.W. 7 Satya Narayan and P.W. 12 K.P. Verma to press into service. They were requisitioned at the behest of P.W. 10 and they moved in the company of P.W. 5 and other police officers who arranged to lay a trap. Both P.W. 7 and 12 were at first brought to the Dak Bungalow, where all others had assembled, so much so that P.W. 7 was asked to go very close to the appellant and to give signal when the bribe-money would be paid to the appellant. Both the witnesses were kept moving in the company of the police officials from beginning to end and obviously it cannot be denied that they were acting under the influence and dictate of the police officials and as such, it has been rightly argued on behalf of the appellant that they, in fact, were not independent witnesses to corroborate the statements of all other police officials examined in this case, but nonetheless, their evidence deserves full consideration for a just decision of this case. 13. The prosecution has laid too much of stress on the circumstantial evidence. It has been stated that the very fact that the carbonate solution turned pink when the fingers of the accused-appellant were put in the glass containing the solution provides ample proof of the fact that the tainted notes passed through the hands of the appellant and that he took the money as bribe for showing favour to P.W. 5 Darbari Paswan. Circumstantial evidence, needs a careful scrutiny. Circumstantial evidence, cannot be deemed to be a safe-instrument in the hands of the prosecution to strike at and to prove the accusation against a person, as in most of the cases, it is subjected to different interpretations at different stages. True it is that it is the concensus opinion, as held by different High Courts and also the Supreme Court that it may provide a good base for conviction only if it is proved that the evidence is incompatible with the innocence of the accused and leads to only irresistible conclusion of guilt and is not subject to any other interpretation and explanation. In the instant case evidence has been led in support of the fact that when the decoy P.W. 5 passed on the money, the appellant took it and kept it in the drawer of the table. P.Ws. In the instant case evidence has been led in support of the fact that when the decoy P.W. 5 passed on the money, the appellant took it and kept it in the drawer of the table. P.Ws. 5, 7, 8 and 10 referred to above have deposed to this state of affairs. It is also the case of the prosecution that as soon as the police officials ran inside the room on getting the signal, they caught hold of the appellant. P.W. 9 has stated that he caught hold of both the wrists of the appellant, so did P.W. 8 and P.W. 10. It simply appears ridiculous. It is not the case of the prosecution that the accused appellant had made any attempt to run away and as such, there was no occasion for anyone of them for catching hold of him, but even assuming, in order to give a show that he was taken into custody, P.W. 9 caught hold of his hands, there was no point that others too would come to repeat the same process. Counsel for the appellant has submitted that the aforesaid circumstances creates a reasonable doubt that these police officials were attempting to besmear the hands of the appellant with the phenol powder which they had earlier applied to their hands and probably it was on account of this that the solution turned pink when the fingers of the accused appellant were dipped in the solution. Sri Prakash Narain Pandey, in order to repell the theory advanced on behalf of the appellant has submitted that there is positive evidence to show that each one of them had washed and cleaned their hands with soap and water at the Dak Bungalow when they bad treated the notes with phenolpithalein powder and had prepared the solution. But this is not the end. There is another circumstance on the record which also cannot be lost sight of. P.W.12 S.P. Verma (said to be an independent witness) has stated in an unequivocal term that on being asked by P.W. 10 and others the appellant brought out the notes from the drawer of the table and kept them on the table and those notes were seized and seizure memo was then prepared regarding recovery of the notes from the possession of the appellant. P.W, 10 has also stated that the appellant, after taking out the notes from the drawer counted them and said that the amount was Rs. 50/-. Admittedly the case of the prosecution is that those notes were treated with phenol powder. It is also the case of the prosecution and each one of the official witnesses has testified to the effect that the appellant, after accepting the money kept in the drawer. The tansaction was complete. In the given situation recovery from the drawer would have definitely meant recovery from the possession of the appellant. There was no point in asking the appellant to take the notes out from the drawer. It was just a circumstance created, so that the appellant might have the occasion to touch those notes. Counsel for the appellant has submitted that this was just a rouge in bringing the notes in contact with the appellant, and change of the colour of the solution, therefore, cannot be treated to be a circumstance to prove the charge, more so, in a case where a plea of plantation has been taken. The demonstration of dipping the fingers of the appellant in the solution was done only thereafter. Even on the point of ‘Give and take' of the money, the evidence of P.W. 12 creates some doubt. P.W. 9 has said that he was the first man to run inside chamber on getting the signal of the payment of the amount to the appellant. P.Ws. 5, 7, 8 and 10 followed them and in the end came P.W. 12. He states that he did not hear any talk from anyone regarding any payment or of the passing 12 of the notes nor anybody told that the notes were kept in the drawer. The case of the appellant, as pleaded in the court below is that the money was planted in the drawer without his knowledge and he was subsequently made a victim by P.W. 3, in conspiracy with the decoy P.W. 5 and others. It has been pleaded on his behalf that P.W. 3 was related to Tula Krishna Jha, against whom the appellant had some animocity. P.W. 3 could not deny the relationship with Tula Krishna Jha. He rather stated in court that Tula Krishna Jha might be related to him. It has been pleaded on his behalf that P.W. 3 was related to Tula Krishna Jha, against whom the appellant had some animocity. P.W. 3 could not deny the relationship with Tula Krishna Jha. He rather stated in court that Tula Krishna Jha might be related to him. In this view of the matter the evidence on the question of recovery from the drawer has to be judged from other attending circumstances and the circumstances following the recovery. 14. P.W. 7 (another independent witness) has stated that when the accused-appellant dipped his fingers in the solution, which got pink in colour, the appellant immediately retorted and asked B.N. Jha (P.W. 8) that he had shaken hands with him and let B.N. Jha also dip his finger in the solution which would become pink in colour. P.W. 8 B.N. Jha did not do it. Even the appellant looked for Darbari and gave a challenge that let Darbari be asked to state if he had given any bribe. P.W. 7 has stated that Darbari Paswan was not found immediately. That means he slipped away from the scene and could not face the challenge thrown by the appellant. 15. Defence has brought on the record that despite insistence the person concerned giving the bribe and particularly P.W.8 B.N. Jha did not agree to put his palm in the solution, presumably for fear of being detected. As their palms were tainted, the prosecution has not given any evidence regarding the testing of the palms and fingers of the accused appellant with the solution just after accepting the trained money and before his retouching the same in taking them out from the drawer and putting them on the table after counting. This is a vital omission in the prosecution case. The fingers of both the hands of the appellant were put in the solution and the evidence has been led to show that the solution got pink in colour. It is difficult to accept that both the hands were utilized in taking the money. When the witnesses have been the trained notes being passed on to the appellant and on signal the trappers came and were told that the notes were slipped into the drawer there was no point in asking the accused to take them out. Recovery was there when they could know that the notes were in the drawer. When the witnesses have been the trained notes being passed on to the appellant and on signal the trappers came and were told that the notes were slipped into the drawer there was no point in asking the accused to take them out. Recovery was there when they could know that the notes were in the drawer. Sudden slipping away the decoy and reluctance on the part of P.W. 8 B.N. Jha in demonstrating that his hands were clean creates a reasonable doubt if any such tainted money was accepted by the appellant in the manner, as alleged. The counsel for the appellant has therefore, argued and in my opinion rightly that the prosecution has not come with clean hands. 16. There is another circumstance, which also cannot be lost sight of P.W. 10 N.C. Jha has stated that he had inspected the chamber of the appellant in the morning on 27.9.77, the date of occurrence and the transaction of 'give and take' as alleged by the prosecution took place in the evening. What was the necessity of inspection in the morning. Counsel for the appellant has argued that, there was no other purpose except a successful attempt in planting the money much earlier, of which the appellant has no knowledge and subsequently recovery from the drawer belonging to the appellant kept in a room, which is visited by many, cannot be taken to be a positive proof of, the case, for which the appellant has been charged with. It is also been stated that some other amount was recovered from the personal pockets of the shirt, the appellant was wearing, and had he taken the bribe amount, hw would have normally kept the same in his personal possession instead of dripping them into the drawer of the table, for which there was no apparent cause. 17. The Counsel for the appellant has also referred to the statement of some other defence witnesses to show that the decoy Darbari Paswan was not provided with a job on account of his lapses committed earlier in shunting of train and that there was no motive or cause to ask for any gratification for showing any favour to Darbari Paswan. 18. The case of the prosecution therefore, appears to be full or doubt, the benefit or which must go to the appellant. 18. The case of the prosecution therefore, appears to be full or doubt, the benefit or which must go to the appellant. The result is that the appeal succeeds, the order of the conviction and sentence, as passed in the impugned judgment is set aside and the appellant is acquitted of the charges made against him. Appeal allowed.