Kiran Raj

The Supreme Court of India Division Bench of Justice Pankaj Mithal and Justice Prasanna B. Varale upheld the conviction of a former excise constable from Uttarakhand found guilty of demanding and accepting illegal gratification from a complainant involved in contraband liquor activities, while partially modifying the sentence imposed by the trial court. Taking into account the accused's advanced age of approximately 75 years and the period already spent in custody, the Court reduced the term of imprisonment to the statutory minimum, dismissing the appeal against the concurrent findings of guilt returned by both the trial court and the High Court.

The accused, serving as a constable in the Excise Department in District Udham Singh Nagar, Uttarakhand, allegedly encountered the complainant — a person involved in contraband liquor trade — during a village raid. The complainant had previously been booked on three occasions. During the fourth raid on 16 June 1990, the accused allegedly compelled the complainant to sign documents and demanded Rs. 500 as illegal gratification, threatening to forward a challan to court failing payment.

Also Read: Creamy Layer Status Cannot Be Determined Solely On Parental Salary Income Without Reference To Post And Status: Supreme Court

The complainant subsequently approached the Superintendent of Police (Vigilance), who directed a trap to be organised. Currency notes were treated with phenolphthalein powder in the presence of independent witnesses. The accused accepted the tainted notes at a restaurant, and his hands tested positive for the powder upon immersion in sodium carbonate solution.

A chargesheet was filed under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The accused denied the allegations, contending false implication due to personal enmity and alleged contradictions in witness testimony.

The Court examined the oral testimonies of the two principal witnesses and found them reliable and consistent. On the testimony of the complainant, the High Court observed that he "has narrated the entire incidents in his chief examination right from raiding of village including his house by accused appellant in suspicion of manufacturing of contraband liquor till acceptance of Rs. 500/- as gratification by accused" and that he "has also proved the identity of currency notes, which were received by Raj Bahadur Singh in his hands."

Regarding the shadow witness, the Court recorded that he "is an independent witness who has corroborated the entire chain of occurrence in pith and substance leaving minor discrepancies, which are ignorable."

On the contention that the shadow witness was an interested witness, the Court observed that "merely on the statement that PW-2 had an acquaintance with PW-1, one cannot jump to the conclusion that PW-2 was an interested witness" and that "to brand the witness as an interested witness, the defence is required to bring specific material before the Court showing the hostility of the particular witness."

On the reliability of the defence witness, the High Court stated that "he is not trustworthy at all because he is a local resident of town Khatima" and further noted that "a small restaurant owner cannot incur wrath of his native person and that too of a Government servant Constable of excise Police, who has been linked with other Government servants, just to open door for all the troubles in running his small restaurant."

On the accused's failure to examine himself as a defence witness, the High Court recorded that the "Act provides an opportunity to the accused to get himself examined in the open court on oath in order to reveal the truth but he has not dared to avail this opportunity."

On the non-production of tainted currency notes, the Supreme Court noted that "this ground was never raised neither before the Trial Court nor before the High Court" and that "this ground is not even raised as one of the grounds in the special leave petition filed in this Court." The Court further recorded that the "handing over the currency notes to the accused and acceptance of the currency notes and thereafter, the hands and the currency notes being exposed to water turned pink showing the trace of phenolphthalein powder, is also recorded in the duly drawn panchnama."

On the overall finding, the Supreme Court stated that "the learned Trial Court as well as High Court on appreciation of evidence, committed no error in holding the appellant guilty for the offences committed under Section 7 and Section 13(2) of P.C. Act."

Also Read: Children Pushed Into 'Terrible Rat Race' As Education Becomes Mere Means To Secure Medical Or Engineering Seats: Madras High Court

The Court directed: "The sentence awarded by the Trial Court and upheld by the High Court can be modified to the extent of minimum sentence for the said offences namely, rigorous imprisonment of 6 months for the offence under Section 7 of P.C. Act and rigorous imprisonment of 1 year for the offence under Section 13(2) of P.C. Act."

"Sentence of the appellant stands modified to rigorous imprisonment of 6 months for the offence under Section 7 of P.C. Act and rigorous imprisonment of 1 year for the offence under Section 13(2) of P.C. Act. The appeal is disposed of."

Advocates Representing the Parties

For Appellant(s): Ms. Manika Tripathy, AOR Mr. Ashutosh Kaushik, Adv. Mr. Gautam Yadav, Adv.

For Respondent(s): Mr. Akshat Kumar, AOR Mr. Vikas Negi, Adv.

Case Title: Raj Bahadur Singh v. State of Uttarakhand

Neutral Citation: 2026 INSC 239

Case Number: Criminal Appeal No. 1105 of 2013

Bench: Justice Pankaj Mithal and Justice Prasanna B. Varale