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: 1995 SCC (5) 320; AIR 1995 SC 2121
Not yet re-checked.
CW-1995-0005Durg, ChhattisgarhJudgment 12 July 1995
Pulgaon Police Sub-Inspector (Officer-in-charge) v. State of Madhya Pradesh
The Supreme Court confirmed the conviction of Sub-Inspector, officer-in-charge of Pulgaon police station, for obtaining illegal gratification of Rs.500 from complainant [name withheld], who had come to report his wife's disappearance and was detained until he paid. The Court held that both the trial court and the High Court had rightly found the case proved beyond reasonable doubt through corroborated trap evidence. It reduced the one year's rigorous imprisonment to the period already undergone but maintained the Rs.1,000 fine with the default clause. The trial court's acquittal under Section 161 IPC was left undisturbed. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.
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 12 July 1995 in Criminal Appeal No. 571 of 1991, the Supreme Court of India (Coram: K. Jayachandra Reddy, M.M. Punchhi, JJ.) affirmed the conviction of the Sub-Inspector (Officer-in-charge), Pulgaon Police Station, Durg.
- Register number
- CG 07 CW 0001
- Case reference
- Criminal Appeal No. 571 of 1991 / 1995 SCC (5) 320; AIR 1995 SC 2121
- Court and date
- Supreme Court of India (Coram: K. Jayachandra Reddy, M.M. Punchhi, JJ.), 12 July 1995
- Officer(s) at the material time
- Sub-Inspector (Officer-in-charge), Pulgaon Police Station, Durg
- Present service status
- Not ascertained from the cited sources.
- Provisions invoked
- Section 161 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860
- Finding of the Court (extract)
- “Applying the above ratio to the facts of this case we hold that both the courts have rightly held that the prosecution has proved its case beyond all reasonable doubt.”
- Verdict, sentence and quantum
- Conviction upheld. Sentence: imprisonment and fine.
- 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 12 July 1995 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.
“Applying the above ratio to the facts of this case we hold that both the courts have rightly held that the prosecution has proved its case beyond all reasonable doubt.”
Separate from verification
Institutional response
12 Jul 1995
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: 1995 SCC (5) 320; AIR 1995 SC 2121
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.