Karnataka HC Upholds Motor Vehicle Inspector’s Bribery Acquittal After Complainant And Shadow Witness Give Conflicting Trap Accounts

The prosecution alleged that the respondent, a Senior Motor Vehicle Inspector deputed to the ARTO office at Nagamangala, demanded ₹4,500 from the complainant for valuation reports for two vehicles and instructed him to place the money on a table

The trial court acquitted the respondent of offences under Sections 7 and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

The State appealed against the acquittal

The prosecution case concerned Sections 7, 13(1)(d) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988

The Court assessed whether the evidence established the alleged demand and acceptance and considered whether the sanctioning authority had applied its mind before issuing the sanction order

The complainant did not fully support the prosecution, and the evidence of the complainant and shadow witness was inconsistent regarding the money’s handling; the respondent did not touch the money, and the hand-wash solution did not change colour

The Court also noted that the alleged initial demand was dated 5 January 2008, while the respondent assumed charge at Nagamangala on 7 January 2008

Further, the sanction order stated that the hand-wash test was positive, contrary to the prosecution’s case, leading the Court to agree that the sanction had been issued mechanically

On re-examination of the record, the Court found no legal or factual error in the acquittal

dismissed the State’s appeal, leaving the acquittal undisturbed