As per case facts...the appellant, a licensed stamp vendor, was caught in a trap by the Anti-Corruption Branch for allegedly demanding and accepting an excess amount for a stamp paper. ... The Trial Court and High Court convicted him, finding that a licensed stamp vendor is a "public servant" under the PC Act. The question arose...twofold: first, whether a licensed stamp vendor is a 'public servant' under Section 2(c)(i) of the PC Act; and second, whether the conviction was sustainable given the lack of conclusive proof of demand and acceptance of the bribe. Finally...the Supreme Court concluded that a licensed stamp vendor is indeed a public servant, as the discount constitutes remuneration by the government for performing a public duty. However, due to material inconsistencies in witness testimonies and the tainted nature of the legal payment, the prosecution failed to establish the crucial element of demand for illegal gratification beyond a reasonable doubt, compelling the setting aside of the conviction.