In a recent ruling, the Kerala High Court upheld the conviction of a Village Officer who was found guilty of accepting a bribe of Rs. 500. The court stated that the appellant, working as a public servant in his capacity as a Village Officer, had abused his official position and adopted corrupt means to avail himself of pecuniary advantage.
The case involved the appellant, who was accused of obtaining a bribe of Rs. 650 from a complainant in exchange for providing a location map for a property. After a trial, the appellant was convicted and sentenced to six months of rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 10,000 under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act. The appellant then appealed the conviction, arguing that the prosecution failed to prove the demand for illegal gratification.
During the hearing, the court considered the evidence presented by the prosecution, which relied on the testimony of the complainant, the decoy witness, an independent witness, and the investigating officer. The complainant stated that after submitting an application for a possession certificate, the appellant demanded a bribe of Rs. 500 for issuing the location map. The decoy witness confirmed the events and testified that the appellant accepted the money. Additionally, the investigating officer conducted a phenolphthalein test, which revealed the presence of the tainted notes on the appellant's hands and shirt pocket.
The court dismissed the arguments put forth by the appellant's counsel, noting that although there were minor contradictions in the complainant's testimony, they were insignificant and did not undermine the prosecution's case. The court emphasized that direct evidence is not always necessary to establish demand and acceptance of a bribe, as established in a previous ruling.
Based on the evidence presented, the court affirmed the lower court's decision, stating that the demand and acceptance of the illegal gratification had been adequately proven. The court considered the concrete evidence, including the phenolphthalein test results, which indicated that the appellant had indeed accepted and handled the tainted notes.
Consequently, the court upheld the appellant's conviction and the sentence imposed by the lower court. The Village Officer will serve six months of simple imprisonment and pay a fine of Rs. 10,000 under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, as well as one year of rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 15,000 under Section 13(1)(d) read with 13(2) of the same Act.
Picture Source :
