Aman Bhatia, a licensed stamp vendor, was accused of demanding an additional ₹2 for a ₹10 stamp paper from a complainant in 2003. The Anti-Corruption Branch (ACB) set up a trap, and Bhatia was caught accepting the bribe. He was convicted by the Trial Court and Delhi High Court under Sections 7 (bribery) and 13(1)(d) (criminal misconduct) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The Supreme Court examined Section 2(c)(i) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, which defines a public servant as someone "remunerated by the Government for performing a public duty." The Court concluded that stamp vendors, who ensure access to stamps for legal transactions and receive remuneration through discounts under the Delhi Stamp Rules, 1934, qualify as public servants. Regarding Bhatia’s conviction, the Court noted significant discrepancies in the testimonies of the complainant, panch witness, and Raid Officer about the demand and acceptance of the bribe. The Court emphasized that merely recovering tainted money is not enough; the prosecution must prove the demand beyond reasonable doubt. Due to insufficient evidence, the conviction was overturned.