Chhattisgarh High Court Acquits Education Official, Says Recovery Alone Not Enough
Chhattisgarh High Court acquits education department accountant in a 2014 bribery case, holding that mere recovery of tainted cash cannot sustain a conviction without proof of demand.
The Chhattisgarh High Court has acquitted an education department official in a bribery case dating back more than a decade, holding that the mere recovery of tainted currency notes cannot lead to conviction unless the prosecution proves a demand for illegal gratification beyond reasonable doubt.
A single Bench of Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi set aside a 2017 trial court order that had sentenced Murali Prasad Choudhary, an accountant in the office of the District Education Officer in Surajpur district, to prison. The High Court in Bilaspur passed the order on Friday.
Mr. Choudhary, 41, had challenged the special court's order convicting him under provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
"Demand of illegal gratification is the gravamen of the offence, and unless the prosecution proves such demand beyond reasonable doubt, mere recovery of tainted currency notes from the accused cannot lead to conviction," the High Court said.
According to the order, Mohit Ram Rajwade, president and manager of Maa Saraswati Shiksha Samiti, had approached the DEO office in 2014 in connection with recognition of a school run by the organisation.
The prosecution alleged that on June 20, 2014, Mr. Choudhary demanded ₹15,000 from Mr. Rajwade and asked him to pay ₹5,000 immediately, of which ₹4,900 was allegedly paid.
Mr. Rajwade approached the Anti-Corruption Bureau in Bilaspur on June 21, 2014, and submitted a written complaint. During verification, he was instructed to record his conversations with Mr. Choudhary. The prosecution relied on these conversations, during which the bribe amount was allegedly brought down to ₹8,000.
Based on the complaint and the alleged recordings, the ACB laid a trap on June 30, 2014. According to the prosecution, Mr. Choudhary accepted ₹8,000 from the complainant, counted the currency notes and kept them in the left pocket of his trousers, after which he was apprehended.
The ACB filed a chargesheet against Mr. Choudhary, and the special court subsequently convicted and sentenced him.
Mr. Choudhary's counsel, Ashutosh Trivedi, argued that proof of both demand and acceptance of illegal gratification was essential to establish the offences. He submitted that Mr. Rajwade and another witness, Kunwar Sai, had turned hostile and did not support the prosecution's case.
Opposing the appeal, Deputy Advocate General D.R. Minj argued that the tainted money was recovered from the left pocket of Mr. Choudhary's trousers and that the recovery was supported by independent and police witnesses.
The High Court, however, noted that the complainant was the primary witness on the issue of demand and acceptance, and that he had turned completely hostile.
Mr. Rajwade deposed categorically that Mr. Choudhary had never demanded any bribe from him, the Court said. He said a person named Dr. Pratap had told him that a bank fixed deposit account was required to obtain recognition for the school, and that he had handed over ₹9,000 to Dr. Pratap for that purpose.
The complainant also said that his signatures on police documents and panchnamas were obtained at a rest house without their contents being read out to him, the Court noted.
The Judge observed that none of the witnesses supported the most essential ingredient of the offence, namely, the demand for illegal gratification.