The Supreme Court in P. Somaraju v. State of Andhra Pradesh set aside the High Court’s conviction and restored the Trial Court’s acquittal, reaffirming that mere recovery of tainted currency is insufficient for conviction under the Prevention of Corruption Act without clear proof of demand and acceptance. The appellant, an Assistant Labour Commissioner, was accused of demanding a bribe for licence renewal, but the prosecution relied solely on the complainant’s testimony. The mediator was kept outside during the trap, contrary to procedure, leaving no independent corroboration. The phenolphthalein test was negative, and defence witnesses supported the claim that the complainant had the opportunity to plant the money in the drawer. The Supreme Court emphasized the “double presumption of innocence” in acquittal appeals and held that the Trial Court’s view was a reasonable one, not perverse. Since the prosecution failed to prove demand and voluntary acceptance beyond reasonable doubt, the conviction could not stand.