Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 – s.8 – Conviction under – When not sustainable – PW-4 complained that when he had approached Indian Airlines Office for reservation of a seat, an Airlines employee advised him to contact Appellant – Appellant told him that though, there was long waiting list but he can arrange a confirmed ticket and demanded Rs.2,100/- as against the actual fair of Rs. 1646/- – Appellant convicted u/s.8 – Held: Evidence adduced by the prosecution is vague as to for whom the appellant demanded the money and whether the person for whom the appellant demanded and received the money was a public servant – Though the receiver of the money may not be a public servant, like in the present case, the prosecution has to establish that the amount was received for inducing a public servant for doing something in his official capacity – In the absence of evidence to show that the appellant received money to induce a public servant to get the confirmation of the ticket, the conviction of the appellant cannot be sustained and he is acquitted.
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988– s.8– Offence under– Factors to be proved– Discussed.
Allowing the appeal, the Court
HELD: 1.1 In order to establish the offence under Section
8 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 it must be proved:
(i) That the accused accepted or obtained, or agreed to accept, or attempted to obtain, from someone; (ii) For himself or for some other person; (iii) Any gratification whatever; (iv) As a motive or reward for inducing by corrupt or illegal means any ‘public servant’ to do or forbear to do any official act or to show favour or render any service to any of the persons specified in the section. [Para 5] [1062-D-E]
1.2 In the present case, the evidence adduced by the prosecution is vague for whom the appellant had demanded the money and whether the person for whom the appellant demanded and received the money is a public servant. Though the receiver of the money, like in the present case may not be a public servant, the prosecution has to establish by convincing evidence that the amount must have been received for inducing a public servant for doing something by that public servant in his official capacity. So far as confirmation of the seat in the Indian Airlines, there may be persons in the middle who may be a public servant or a travel agency or others. In the absence of convincing evidence to show that the appellant had received the money from PW-4, to induce a public servant to get the confirmation of the ticket, the conviction of the appellant cannot be sustained. The appellant is acquitted. [Para 6] [1062-G-H; 1063-A-B]
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.