Case Note & Summary
The State of Maharashtra appealed against the acquittal of Syed Imam and Durgadas Kaushalye, a Police Sub Inspector and Police Head Constable, respectively, for offences under Sections 7 read with 12, 13(1)(d) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The case arose from a complaint by Mohammad Abdul Kalim, who alleged that on 7 January 2004, accused No.1 demanded Rs.15,000/- to prevent the removal of his shed, which was allegedly encroaching on Waqf Board land. A trap was laid, and the accused were caught accepting the bribe. The trial court acquitted the accused, finding the trap witness (panch witness) unreliable and his testimony uncorroborated. The High Court, in appeal, upheld the acquittal, holding that the prosecution failed to prove demand and acceptance beyond reasonable doubt. The court noted that the panch witness had turned hostile and his evidence was not credible. The presumption under Section 20 of the PC Act did not arise as acceptance was not proved. The appeal was dismissed.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Corruption - Demand and Acceptance of Bribe - Sections 7, 12, 13(1)(d), 13(2) Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 - The State appealed against acquittal of two police officers for demanding and accepting bribe of Rs.15,000/- from a complainant to not remove his shed. The High Court upheld acquittal, finding the trap witness (panch witness) unreliable and his testimony uncorroborated. The court held that the prosecution failed to prove demand and acceptance beyond reasonable doubt, and the presumption under Section 20 of the PC Act did not arise as acceptance was not proved. (Paras 1-10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the acquittal of the respondents for offences under Sections 7, 12, 13(1)(d) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 was justified given the evidence on record.
Final Decision
Appeal dismissed; acquittal of respondents upheld.
Law Points
- Presumption under Section 20 of PC Act arises only when acceptance of bribe is proved
- Standard of proof in criminal cases is beyond reasonable doubt
- Acquittal can be based on unreliable trap witness and lack of corroboration
