Date not established
Conviction
ConcludedThe trial court convicted the accused police personnel, as recorded in the Supreme Court of India judgment.
Conviction · Supports allegation.
Source: AIR 1968 SC 1419; (1969) 1 SCR 183
Not yet re-checked.
CW-1968-0001South Delhi, DelhiJudgment 1 May 1968
Delhi Police personnel vs Delhi Administration
The judgment of the Supreme Court of India records the following account. Police officer went in uniform to an Andrews Ganj man's Andrews Ganj house on 29 August 1963, accused the family of disposing of an illegitimate child, and demanded Rs.1,000 to save them from prosecution, taking Rs.90 plus a written undertaking and seizing a gold ring from an Andrews Ganj man An anti-corruption trap on 4 September 1963 recovered marked Rs.700 notes from his pocket. The Special Judge convicted him under s.5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act 1947 and s.161 IPC, and the Punjab High Court affirmed the two-year concurrent RI sentences while setting aside the fine. The Supreme Court held that obtaining money by threatening an imaginary prosecution still constitutes illegal gratification and criminal misconduct, and dismissed the appeal.
Externally reportedV2
What this record means
This page documents a court-adjudicated case from the judgment and cited sources below. Findings are attributed to the court; this record does not add findings of its own.
How verification works →Detailed record
Report card
By judgment dated 1 May 1968 in Criminal Appeal No. 124 of 1966, the Supreme Court of India (Coram: V. Ramaswami, C.A. Vaidialingam, JJ.) affirmed the conviction of the Police personnel, Delhi Police.
- Register number
- DL 03 CW 0002
- Case reference
- Criminal Appeal No. 124 of 1966 / AIR 1968 SC 1419; (1969) 1 SCR 183
- Court and date
- Supreme Court of India (Coram: V. Ramaswami, C.A. Vaidialingam, JJ.), 1 May 1968
- Officer(s) at the material time
- Police personnel, Delhi Police
- Present service status
- Not ascertained from the cited sources.
- Provisions invoked
- Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947; Section 161 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860
- Finding of the Court (extract)
- “Upon the finding of the High Court in this case it is manifest that the appellant grossly abused his position as a police officer and extorted money from an Andrews Ganj man and his wife and also a gold ring …” (at para n/a)
- Verdict, sentence and quantum
- Conviction upheld. Sentence: imprisonment; maximum substantive term of 2 years.
- Present status of the proceedings
- No further proceedings are recorded in the cited sources; the judgment is the concluded position shown.
Compiled from the judgment and the cited sources. Findings are those of the court; this card adds none of its own.
Current position
The Supreme Court of India judgment dated 1 May 1968 is the concluded position shown in the cited sources.
Evidence position
Recorded allegations
OtherPrimary
Material fact supported
Reliable material supports a specifically documented fact relevant to that allegation, not necessarily the full allegation, causation, intent, unlawfulness, or responsibility.
Official finding: supports allegation.
Attributed to the court
What the court found
Holding not recorded separately.
“Upon the finding of the High Court in this case it is manifest that the appellant grossly abused his position as a police officer and extorted money from an Andrews Ganj man and his wife and also a gold ring …” (para n/a)
Separate from verification
Institutional response
1 May 1968
Order issued
ConcludedThe Supreme Court of India dismissed the appeal and upheld the convictions of police personnel.
Conviction · Supports allegation (appellate affirmance; trial conviction separate card).
Source: AIR 1968 SC 1419; (1969) 1 SCR 183
Not yet re-checked.
Continuing record
Follow-up history
19 Sep 2026
(Round-8 full re-verification: published record re-checked against the judgment text (outcome, officers, quote, key facts) plus methodology-compliance pass; skills-guided adversarial re-verification of the published record against the judgment text (reverify/t1-*/adversarial-8.jsonl))
Corrections (0): No corrections recorded.
Review: Solo Staff combined review (one combined attestation) — not yet recorded.