'Corruption has no Straight Pattern': HC refuses to quash Bribery Case against Excise Office

Recently, the Calcutta High Court declined to interfere with criminal proceedings against an excise officer accused of demanding illegal gratification for facilitating a liquor licence, holding that the material on record discloses a prima facie case warranting trial. Relying on the trap proceedings and supporting forensic evidence, the Court indicated that such allegations cannot be examined in a limited jurisdiction at the threshold, reinforcing a cautious approach in matters involving corruption by public officials.

The case arose from a complaint alleging that the officer demanded a substantial illegal gratification to facilitate the grant of a liquor licence, with a portion of the amount sought as an initial payment. Acting on the complaint, the Anti-Corruption Branch conducted a trap operation during which the officer was apprehended. The defence challenged the proceedings, arguing a lack of jurisdiction, absence of preliminary enquiry, and failure to prove demand or acceptance of a bribe, particularly since the tainted money was not recovered directly from his possession. It was also contended that the officer could not have influenced the licence process as it fell outside his territorial posting. The prosecution, however, relied on the complainant’s statement, shadow witness account, and forensic evidence indicating contact with tainted currency to substantiate the allegations.

The Court observed that corruption cannot be assessed within rigid boundaries and officials may project influence beyond formal jurisdiction. It remarked, “The manner and mode of corruption cannot be defined in a straitjacket formula. The corrupt officials know many tricks…” to suggest that jurisdictional limitations cannot, at this stage, negate the possibility of influence. The Court further noted that forensic analysis confirming handling of tainted currency, coupled with witness statements indicating demand, lends sufficient weight to the prosecution's case. It also dismissed objections regarding procedural lapses, including the argument that the Anti-Corruption Branch could not act on a weekend.

Consequently, the Court refused to quash the criminal proceedings, allowing the trial to proceed in accordance with the law.

Disclaimer: This news/ article includes information received via a syndicated news feed. The original rights remain with the respective publisher.