High Court affirms four-year sentence of Delhi cop in 30-year-old bribery case
The Delhi High Court has upheld the conviction of a Delhi Police Sub-Inspector in a 30-year-old bribery case, holding that the prosecution had successfully established the demand and acceptance of illegal gratification.
New Delhi: The Delhi High Court has upheld the conviction of a Delhi Police Sub-Inspector in a 30-year-old bribery case, holding that the prosecution had successfully established the demand and acceptance of illegal gratification.
Dismissing the criminal appeal, a single-judge Bench of Justice Chandrasekharan Sudha refused to interfere with the 2003 judgment of the trial court, which had found Sub-Inspector Manoj Kumar guilty under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947, and sentenced him to four years’ rigorous imprisonment.
“The only point that arises for consideration in the present appeal is whether there is any infirmity in the impugned judgment calling for an interference by this Court.
On an overall appreciation of the evidence on record, this Court finds no such infirmity,” Justice Sudha observed.
The prosecution case arose from a 1995 complaint alleging that the appellant, then posted at Jama Masjid police station, had demanded a bribe of Rs 5,000 from the complainant for not taking adverse action against him in a criminal case relating to the sale of fake university degrees.
Acting on the complaint, the CBI’s Anti-Corruption Branch laid a trap at Tis Hazari Courts, during which Rs 4,000 was recovered from a head constable who had accepted the money on the appellant’s instructions.
Follow for more details: munsifdaily.com
Rejecting the defence argument that the demand was not proved due to the non-examination of certain witnesses, the Delhi High Court held that the testimony of the complainant remained consistent and credible.
“The complainant in a case of this nature is not an accomplice, and it is not always necessary that his testimony has to be corroborated by independent evidence,” it said.
Justice Sudha also brushed aside objections raised over the non-examination of certain witnesses, including the complainant’s son and other police officials.
“Evidence has to be weighed and not counted,” the judgment said, adding that the non-examination of some witnesses did not undermine the prosecution’s case.
On the challenge to the admissibility of the audio recording relied upon by the prosecution, the Delhi High Court said that even if the cassette and transcript were ignored, there was sufficient independent material on record to sustain the conviction.
“The demand for the bribe was not made for the first time when the conversation was recorded, but on an earlier date,” Justice Sudha said.
Concluding that the foundational facts of demand and acceptance had been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, the Delhi High Court held that the statutory presumption under the Prevention of Corruption Act stood attracted and had not been rebutted by the appellant.
“I do not find any reason to disbelieve the prosecution’s case,” Justice Sudha said, dismissing the appeal and affirming the conviction and sentence awarded by the trial court.
