The Supreme Court acquitted a public servant in a corruption case, holding that mere receipt of bribe money by an intermediary is insufficient to establish the public servant's criminal liability without reliable evidence connecting the demand and acceptance to the accused. In Bharat Raj Meena v. Central Bureau of Investigation, the accused, a former Railway Protection Force officer, was alleged to have obtained illegal gratification through subordinate personnel in connection with transfers and postings. The prosecution relied on several transactions and evidence concerning intermediaries who allegedly collected money. The Court reiterated that proof of demand and voluntary acceptance or obtainment of illegal gratification is fundamental to offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act. The statutory presumption under Section 20 can arise only after foundational facts are established by reliable evidence. The Court also observed that accomplice or approver evidence requires material corroboration connecting the accused personally with the offence. In the absence of sufficient independent evidence establishing the accused's demand and involvement, reasonable doubt remained. The Supreme Court consequently allowed the appeals and acquitted the appellant.