SC acquits ex-RPF officer in corruption case, cites CBI's 'impatience' in probe

The Supreme Court has acquitted a public servant in a corruption case that began more than 20 years ago after a trap was laid over an alleged bribery demand. The court said there were serious doubts about the way the Central Bureau of Investigation conducted the operation and held that the prosecution failed to prove that the money recovered was meant for the appellant.

Allowing two appeals against the Kerala High Court's May 2024 orders, which had upheld his conviction and sentence by a special trial court, the Supreme Court said "the trap was not permitted to run its full course."

It also said the "serious lacuna and impatience" of the CBI in the investigation would benefit the appellant.

The case related to allegations that the appellant, while serving as Divisional Security Commissioner of the Railway Protection Force, had abused his official position by demanding and obtaining illegal gratification through subordinate officials acting as intermediaries.

The alleged payments were said to have been taken from RPF personnel seeking transfers, postings and other service-related benefits. The investigation later led to multiple final reports and several prosecutions based on separate alleged transactions of illegal gratification.

A bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and N Kotiswar Singh said there were elements of doubt in the manner in which the trap was carried out. The court noted that the complainant had apparently informed the CBI on August 3, 2005, about the alleged bribe demand and the agency decided to lay a trap the very next day.

The FIR was registered on August 4, 2005 and the trap was executed on the same day.

"It is surprising that the CBI started the investigation of a cognizable offence by way of verifying the complaint of bribery even before the formal FIR was lodged. It is also noticed that the CBI arranged the two independent trap witnesses at a very short period of time before the execution of the trap," the bench said in its September 16 verdict.

The bench said that while the investigating agency could not be faulted for organising the trap in such an "extraordinarily speedy manner", it did raise doubts.

It said the trial court had brushed aside the doubts raised by the appellant.

"Keeping into consideration the observations made by the trial court in para 150 of its judgment as reproduced above, we are of the view that there are certainly elements of doubt in the manner the trap was executed, which the trial court ignored. The lapses noted by the trial court, in our opinion, raise reasonable doubt on the prosecution case," it said.

The court further said that once the CBI was informed that the appellant was allegedly demanding a bribe, it chose to lay a trap for him, but did not allow the operation to proceed fully.

"It is relevant to consider the reason the trap was not permitted to run its full course as against the appellant," the bench said. It added that if the money was ultimately meant to reach the appellant, the agency should have kept watch on him and not only on the person who was later examined as an approver and prosecution witness during the trial.

Had the chain been allowed to complete, the bench said, the resulting evidence would have spoken more directly to the appellant's culpability than the recovery that was actually made.

Explaining the legal position, the bench said criminality under the Prevention of Corruption Act does not arise merely because money changes hands.

"What the prosecution is required to establish is that the public servant demanded, accepted or obtained gratification other than legal remuneration as a motive or reward for performing, forbearing or facilitating an official act. Consequently, proof of demand and acceptance occupies a position of central importance in prosecutions under the Act," it said.

Finding "lingering reasonable doubts", the court held that the charge had not been proved beyond reasonable doubt and acquitted the appellant of all charges in the two cases.- Ends(With PTI inputs)Published By: India Today Web Desk Published On: Sep 19, 2026 15:15 IST