E-Paper
Not guilty, says Delhi HC 23 years after judge convicted 2 engineers for bribery
A bench of justice justice Chandrashekharan Sudha observed that suspicion, howsoever strong, could not replace the need for proof and acquitted the two men
The Delhi high court has set aside a 2002 verdict convicting two engineers of the city government’s flood control department for accepting ₹1,800 in bribes from a contractor’s employee in 1991, holding that the trial court had ruled against them on the basis of “unsatisfactory evidence”.
In a 48-page judgment, justice Chandrashekharan Sudha said the material on record was insufficient to establish their guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
“Suspicion, however strong, cannot take the place of proof. Therefore, I find that the appellants/ A1 (Assistant Engineer VK Datta) and A2 (Junior Engineer Dinesh Garg) 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 court held in its verdict of April 2.
The court also noted that crucial witnesses, including the contractor, whose employee had filed the complaint, were not examined during the trial and that there were inconsistencies in the evidence presented by the agency.
The court also underlined that, while the complaint alleged that bribes were paid to have the department clear outstanding dues, it turned out that there were no subsisting dues or liability on the part of the department towards the contractor at the relevant time.
“This also raises doubts regarding the existence of any motive or occasion for the alleged demand of illegal gratification by A1 and A2,” the bench said.
“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..,” the order stated.
“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 Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) was represented by special public prosecutor Atul Guleria.
The two engineers were booked by 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. A trial court convicted them and sentenced them to two years in prison in September 2002.
In their appeal before the high court, the two insisted that they had been falsely implicated in the case and the CBI had 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 at an inspection site.
