Summary
The Supreme Court upheld both corruption convictions and the one-year rigorous imprisonment maintained by the High Court. The complainant’s account of the demand and payment to the second accused at the first accused’s direction was corroborated by the accompanying witness and office assistant, together with the trap evidence. The appellants were directed to surrender within eight weeks to serve the remaining sentence.
Issues
- Whether the demand and acceptance findings were supported by corroborated evidence despite the objection that one accused had not received the money and the other had not demanded it.
Provisions considered
- Sections 7 and 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d), as applicable to the 1994 occurrence, Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988The Court sustained the convictions on the corroborated evidence of demand, directed payment and receipt, supported by the trap proceedings. (¶ 1–5)
Held
- The complainant clearly described the demand and acceptance. Although the accompanying witness turned hostile, his examination-in-chief corroborated that payment was made to A-2 at A-1’s direction. The office assistant also confirmed the instruction to receive the money and the ensuing payment. (¶ 4–5)
- These corroborating accounts and the sodium-carbonate test supported the concurrent findings. There was no sufficient ground to disturb the convictions or the High Court’s one-year sentence. (¶¶ 3, 5–6)
- The appellants must surrender within eight weeks to serve the remaining sentence, failing which they were to be taken into custody. The order was to be sent to the trial court for action. (¶ 7–8)
Result
Appeals dismissed; convictions and one-year rigorous imprisonment upheld. Appellants to surrender within eight weeks, failing which to be taken into custody.