NEW DELHI: Thirty years after they were accused of taking a bribe of Rs 20 to issue an income certificate, Supreme Court has acquitted two govt employees in a 1996 corruption case in which they were convicted and sentenced to one year’s imprisonment by a trial court.A bench of Justices Ujjal Bhuyan and Atul S Chandurkar held that the govt employees were wrongly convicted in the case as there was no evidence that they had demanded the bribe. The aggrieved employees, now senior citizens, had to fight legal battles for three decades to prove their innocence. They were sacked from govt jobs after conviction.“We find on an appreciation of the entire material brought on record by the prosecution that it falls woefully short of proving the charge against both the accused beyond reasonable doubt,” the bench said. The court noted that the demand of bribe was an essential ingredient to convict a person in a corruption case and that was missing in the case.“When any demand was not proved, as held by both the Courts, it was clear that the complainant had thrust the note of ₹20/- in the pocket of accused number 2 without any demand. The defence as raised that the festival of Eid was to be celebrated on the next day and it was for that purpose that the complainant had given the note of Rs 20/- after receiving the necessary certificate, therefore, assumed significance,” the bench said.As per the prosecution case, the clerk had demanded Rs 120 (Rs 100 for himself and Rs 20 for the peon) for issuing an income certificate. The complainant subsequently approached the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB), which organised a trap. The complainant along with the raiding party visited the office and according to prosecution, on receiving such certificate the complainant gave a note of Rs 20/- to A2 who put it in his pocket.
Share your thoughts in the comments
Be respectful · TOI community guidelines
On giving pre-determined signal, the raiding party appeared and, thereafter, drew the necessary panchnama.Allowing relief to the accused, the bench said, “…mere possession of a currency note of Rs 20/- with A2 by itself would not be sufficient to uphold the conviction of A1 and A2 for the offence,” the court said.
