Delhi HC acquits two govt engineers in 35-year-old bribery case

The bench held that the material on record was insufficient to establish their guilt beyond a reasonable doubt and that the trial court erred in relying on unsatisfactory evidence.

New Delhi: The Delhi High Court has acquitted two former engineers of the Delhi government’s flood control department in a 35-year-old corruption case in which they were accused of demanding a bribe of ₹900.

They were convicted and sentenced by the trial court in September 2002, against which they approached the high court.

A bench of Justice Chandrashekharan Sudha, in her April 2 verdict, set aside the trial court’s September 2002 order convicting and sentencing the two—Dinesh Garg and VK Datta—to two years’ imprisonment. The bench held that the material on record was insufficient to establish their guilt beyond a reasonable doubt and that the trial court erred in relying on unsatisfactory evidence.

In its 48-page verdict, the court observed that the FIR was registered even before the complainant reached the Central Bureau of Investigation’s (CBI) office to submit his complaint, that crucial witnesses were not examined and that inconsistencies existed in the evidence presented by the agency.

“The failure of the prosecution to examine the aforesaid crucial witnesses coupled with the aforesaid inconsistencies brought out in the materials, raises further doubts in the mind of the court. The aforesaid aspects raise doubts in the mind of the court regarding the prosecution case and hence it cannot be held that the materials on record are sufficient to find the guilt of the accused persons beyond reasonable doubt,” the order stated.

“Therefore, I find that the appellants/ A1 and A2 are entitled to the benefit of doubt. In such circumstances, it can only be held that the trial court went wrong in relying on the aforesaid unsatisfactory evidence to conclude regarding the guilt of the accused persons,” the order added.

Garg and Datta were represented by advocate Sameer Chandra and senior advocate Sunil Dalal, while the CBI was represented by special public prosecutor Atul Guleria.

The two were booked by the CBI under the Prevention of Corruption Act in September 1991 for allegedly demanding and accepting a bribe of ₹900 to facilitate the clearance of a contractor’s running and final bills during their official duties. They were convicted and sentenced by the trial court in September 2002, against which they approached the high court.

In their appeal before the high court, the two contended that they had been falsely implicated in the case. They argued that the CBI failed to establish any motive or basis for the alleged bribe demand and that their presence at the relevant time is doubtful, as muster rolls show they were not present at the office when the demand was allegedly made but were engaged at an inspection site.

CBI’s lawyer argued that the trial court’s judgment did not suffer from any infirmity, submitting that the court had duly considered all grounds raised and convicted the accused after a comprehensive appreciation of the evidence on record.