Bombay HC Acquits Ex-Income Tax Officer as Prosecution Fails to Prove Demand for Bribe, CBI Trap Collapses [Read Order]

The Bombay High Court at Goa has acquitted a former Income Tax Officer, setting aside his 2016 conviction under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

The Court held that the CBI failed to establish the most fundamental requirement in bribery cases that is proof of demand for illegal gratification resulting in the whole trap operation being unreliable and legally unsustainable.

Justice Ashish S. Chavan observed that mere recovery of tainted money, without proof of a clear and voluntary demand, cannot result in conviction under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

According to the bench, demand and acceptance are sine qua non for conviction under the PC Act, and the statutory presumption under Section 20 cannot arise unless the prosecution first proves demand through credible evidence.

The prosecution had alleged that Reddy demanded ₹1 lakh later negotiated to ₹60,000 from the partners of M/s Swastik Cruises during scrutiny of their income tax return for AY 2007-08.

The CBI, based on the complaint received from the partners of Swastik Cruise, laid a trap at a Hotel in Panaji on 13 July 2009, where Reddy was allegedly caught receiving ₹30,000 in tainted currency.

However, during trial and in the appeal, the complainant, his brother, and the firm’s chartered accountant gave contradictory versions regarding the timing, amount, and nature of the alleged bribe demand.

The High Court found serious inconsistencies in the narration of the complainant which conflicted with his written complaint, his brother contradicted both with himself. Additionally, his CA introduced an entirely different account, even stating the bribe was demanded “per year,” which the Court called illogical.

Also read: GST dept cannot Block ITC Exceeding available Credit in ECL: P& H HC directs for Recovery, quashes Negative Block Order [Read Order]

The Court also observed unexplained delays in lodging the complaint and noted that no demand was made during verification, pre-trap, or trap proceedings, as confirmed by the CBI’s own independent witnesses.

The trap-laying officer admitted that no specific demand was made while the accused and complainant were seated at the restaurant. Even the panch witness, positioned only a few feet away, admitted he could not hear any conversation and could not recall any bribe-related words from the recorded tapes.

With regards to the electronic evidence, the Court held that the CBI failed to comply with measures regulating the tape-recorded evidence. The original recordings were unclear, voices were identified from CDs created six years later, and the forensic expert admitted the possibility of manipulation. This rendered the electronic evidence unreliable and inadmissible.

As this basic fact was missing, it was ruled that the Sessions Court erred in convicting the officer based on inferences, conjectures, and mere recovery of money. Therefore the appeal was allowed and the court quashed the conviction.

Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates