The Supreme Court has held that mere possession, or recovery of currency notes from a public official is not enough to substantiate that he took a bribe, and that there has to be conclusive proof that he did make a demand for illegal gratification in order to find him guilty of corruption.
“In the absence of any proof of demand for illegal gratification, the use of corrupt or illegal means or abuse of position as a public servant to obtain any valuable thing or pecuniary advantage cannot be held to be proved,” a Bench of Justices Arun Mishra and Amitava Roy concluded in a recent judgement.
The judgement concerns a police officer in Punjab who was convicted for taking a bribe of Rs. 2000 in 2009. The prosecution said he took the money as illegal gratification to allegedly exonerate an accused, Sarabjit Singh, another police officer, in a dowry harassment case.
The prosecution had argued that Mukhtiar Singh, who was the Station House Officer (SHO) at the Ajnala Police Station, even threatened Sarabjit and the latter lodged a complaint against the SHO with the Vigilance Department. A trap was set and Mukhtiar was allegedly caught having taken the money.
The trial court sentenced him to a year's imprisonment in the graft case. While the appeal was pending in the Punjab and Haryana High Court, Mukhtiar died. His legal heirs continued the fight for him, but eventually failed in the High Court, which confirmed the sentence. The High Court had believed the prosecution's version that the SHO asked Sarabjit if he had brought the money, and this amounted to a demand for payment of bribe.
In the appeal, the Supreme Court held that a mere stray question like that did not confirm the accusation that Mukhtiar had demanded a bribe. Besides, none of the prosecution witnesses could prove the date and time of the receipt of the bribe. Some said the trap was laid at the SHO's residence while others contradicted the version, saying the meeting was held at the police station itself.
“Failure of the prosecution to prove the demand for illegal gratification would be fatal and mere recovery of the amount from the person accused would not entail his conviction,” the Supreme Court held, thus resurrecting the lost cause of the wronged police officer.