as aforesaid, the informant was not at all concerned with the Grampanchayat, whose bills were supposed to be cleared by the applicant. Grampanchayat could not have given any authority to the informant to deal with/handle the affairs of the Grampanchayat on its behalf. Therefore, the basic question is when the informant had no work of his own with the applicant, even if the applicant would have had demanded any amount, whether it would amount to illegal gratification, is a question. Another fact to be noted is that the investigation papers as well as FIR would show that initially the bill was submitted which was not according to the procedure or the articles were not purchased yet the bill was drawn, that itself is an illegal act. Applicant made the informant to purchase those articles first. If he had the intention to seek illegal gratification, then he could have done it earlier also, but it is to be noted that he insisted that the articles should be purchased first. Therefore, the intention is absent here. The FIR appears to have been lodged with some ulterior motive and the contents of FIR as well as the investigation that has been done up till now, especially the pre-trap panchanama, post trap panchanama and the statements of witnesses, are not disclosing any offence much less under Section 7 and 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act. It would be a futile exercise to ask the applicant to face the trial. The case is squarely falls within the parameters laid down in State of Haryana and
