E-Paper
Corruption by police officers erode public trust, says Delhi HC
Justice Girish Kathpalia in the 14-page ruling opined that cases of police corruption contribute to injustice
The Delhi High Court on Monday denied anticipatory bail to a police officer in a corruption case, observing that corruption by police officers erode public trust and dents the efficacy of the judicial system meant for creation of a peaceful society,
Justice Girish Kathpalia in the 14-page ruling opined that cases of police corruption, especially targeting poor and marginalized communities, contribute to injustice and severely injures the body of the entire society.
The ruling stemmed from a petition filed by Delhi Police head constable Devender Kumar, seeking anticipatory bail in a case registered under the Prevention of Corruption Act. The case had stemmed from a complaint filed by a man named Kalu, desribed as a ‘bad character’, who alleged that Kumar and another head constable had demanded `60,000 bribe to avoid falsely implicating him in a complex case.
Kalu said that Kumar received ₹20,000/ and the rest of the amount, ₹40,000, was handed over to the other constable, who took the money and fled.
Represented by senior advocate Ramesh Gupta, Kumar said that the complaint amounted to extortion and did not fall under the scope of the Prevention of Corruption Act. Gupta also pointed out to the 15-day delay in filing the complaint as grounds for bail.
Meanwhile, the Delhi police opposed the bail on the ground that the act amounted to an offence under the Prevention of Corruption Act since the bribe was demanded by Kumar in his capacity as a public servant and received while the co-accused was in uniform.
However, the court noted, “The shadow of corruption continues to plague parts of the police system, thereby undermining public trust. The unrest in society caused by corruption by persons highly placed significantly generates cynicism against the system, thereby denting the efficacy of the judicial system meant for creating a peaceful society. Corruption stands at no lesser footing than the conventional bodily crimes. Rather, corruption severely injures the body of the entire society.”
The judge further mooted for weeding corruption saying, “Victims of such crimes are not just the Kalu’s of the society, but all of us– the entire society. Therefore, the societal approach to corruption should be of not just zero tolerance but absolute intolerance.”
The court also shot down Kumar’s contention that the case did not fall within the ambit of Prevention of Corruption Act saying, “When it comes to police officials indulging in corruption, it would be too simplistic to think that the police official, who is well experienced having been part of many such raids, would so gullibly accept the phenolphthalein coated currency notes in hand. The argument that the offence alleged is extortion, not an offence under the Prevention of Corruption Act, fails to convince.”
