Not responsible, says Delhi HC 23 years after choose convicted 2 engineers for bribery| India Information
The Delhi excessive court docket has put aside a 2002 verdict convicting two engineers of the town authorities’s flood management division for accepting ₹1,800 in bribes from a contractor’s worker in 1991, holding that the trial court docket had dominated in opposition to them on the idea of “unsatisfactory proof”.
In a 48-page judgment, justice Chandrashekharan Sudha mentioned the fabric on document was inadequate to determine their guilt past an affordable doubt.
“Suspicion, nevertheless robust, can’t take the place of proof. Due to this fact, I discover that the appellants/ A1 (Assistant Engineer VK Datta) and A2 (Junior Engineer Dinesh Garg) are entitled to the good thing about doubt. In such circumstances, it will probably solely be held that the trial court docket went fallacious in counting on the aforesaid unsatisfactory proof to conclude concerning the guilt of the accused individuals,” the court docket held in its verdict of April 2.
The court docket additionally famous that essential witnesses, together with the contractor, whose worker had filed the criticism, weren’t examined throughout the trial and that there have been inconsistencies within the proof introduced by the company.
The court docket additionally underlined that, whereas the criticism alleged that bribes had been paid to have the division clear excellent dues, it turned out that there have been no subsisting dues or legal responsibility on the a part of the division in the direction of the contractor on the related time.
“This additionally raises doubts concerning the existence of any motive or event for the alleged demand of unlawful gratification by A1 and A2,” the bench mentioned.
“The failure of the prosecution to look at the aforesaid essential witnesses coupled with the aforesaid inconsistencies introduced out within the supplies, raises additional doubts within the thoughts of the court docket. The aforesaid points elevate doubts within the thoughts of the court docket concerning the prosecution case..,” the order said.
“In such circumstances, it will probably solely be held that the trial court docket went fallacious in counting on the aforesaid unsatisfactory proof to conclude concerning the guilt of the accused individuals,” the order added.
Garg and Datta had been represented by advocate Sameer Chandra and senior advocate Sunil Dalal, whereas the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) was represented by particular public prosecutor Atul Guleria.
The 2 engineers had been booked by CBI below 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 operating and last payments. A trial court docket convicted them and sentenced them to 2 years in jail in September 2002.
Of their enchantment earlier than the excessive court docket, the 2 insisted that that they had been falsely implicated within the case and the CBI had failed to determine any motive or foundation for the alleged bribe demand and that their presence on the related time is uncertain, as muster rolls present they weren’t current on the workplace when the demand was allegedly made however had been at an inspection web site.
Leave a Reply