Share this article
Contradictions in Evidence; Court Says ‘Mere Recovery of Notes Not Enough Without Proof of Demand and Acceptance’
Bilaspur:
The Chhattisgarh High Court has acquitted Baburam Patel, the then reader/clerk of the Bilha Tehsil office, who was convicted under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
Justice Sachin Singh Rajput held that the prosecution failed to prove that the accused had demanded or accepted any illegal gratification.
Case Background –
On February 20, 2002, complainant Mathura Prasad Yadav lodged a complaint with the Lokayukta, Bilaspur, alleging that the accused demanded a ₹5,000 bribe, later settled at ₹2,000, for separating his father’s land record.
A trap was organized, and Patel was allegedly caught with ₹1,500 in marked currency notes. The Lokayukta team claimed positive phenolphthalein test results, and he was convicted under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read with 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act.
He was sentenced to one year of rigorous imprisonment and a fine of ₹500 on each count.
Appeal Before High Court –
Patel challenged the conviction, arguing through counsel Vivek Sharma that he was falsely implicated due to personal enmity – the complainant’s wife was a former Sarpanch against whom Patel had participated in an inquiry.
He further claimed that the ₹1,500 was not a bribe but pending land lease fees collected on behalf of villagers.
Court’s Observations –
Relying on Supreme Court precedents- B. Jayaraj v. State of Andhra Pradesh (2014) and Soundaraya Rajan v. State (2023) -the court held:
“Mere recovery of tainted money is not sufficient to convict the accused unless there is conclusive proof of demand and acceptance.”
The court found several contradictions:
- The complainant admitted he was unsure if the money was bribe or lease fee.
- The complaint was written on the SP’s instructions.
- Recorded conversation was unclear.
- Trap team members gave conflicting statements on where the money was found.
Final Order –
The High Court ruled that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt and the trial court misappreciated evidence.
Accordingly, the conviction dated October 30, 2004, was set aside, and Baburam Patel was acquitted of all charges. As he was already on bail, his bail bonds were discharged.