Date not established
Conviction
ConcludedThe trial court convicted the accused police personnel, as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment.
Conviction · Supports allegation.
Source: (2013) 4 AD 492 : (2013) 2 JCC 1143
Not yet re-checked.
CW-2013-0022North East, DelhiJudgment 2 April 2013
Delhi Police personnel vs C.B.I.
The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal of police-post official [name withheld] of Police Post Usmanpur and confirmed his conviction for demanding and accepting a Rs.200 bribe (balance of a Rs.500 demand) from complainant [name withheld]. A Delhi resident to release his seized welding machine and drop a challan. The CBI trap on 7 September 1994 recovered the treated notes from his shirt pocket. The court held the complainant's testimony, corroborated by the shadow and recovery witnesses, proved demand, acceptance and recovery beyond reasonable doubt, raising the Section 20 presumption which the appellant failed to rebut. It rejected the handshake explanation and held the co-accused constable's acquittal did not enure to the appellant, confirming the 4-year RI sentence. 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 2 April 2013 in CRL.A. No. 630 of 2002, the Delhi High Court (Coram: Mukta Gupta, J.) affirmed the conviction of the Police personnel, Police Post Usmanpur, Delhi Police.
- Register number
- DL 05 CW 0013
- Case reference
- CRL.A. No. 630 of 2002 / (2013) 4 AD 492 : (2013) 2 JCC 1143
- Court and date
- Delhi High Court (Coram: Mukta Gupta, J.), 2 April 2013
- Officer(s) at the material time
- Police personnel, Police Post Usmanpur, Delhi Police
- Present service status
- Not ascertained from the cited sources.
- Provisions invoked
- Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988; Section 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988
- Finding of the Court (extract)
- “Further since the factum of demand, acceptance and recovery of Rs.200/- as bribe has been proved beyond reasonable doubt. Further in view of acceptance being proved the presumption is raised against the Appellant under Section 20 of the PC Act …” (at para 11)
- Verdict, sentence and quantum
- Conviction upheld. Sentence: imprisonment and fine; maximum substantive term of 4 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 Delhi High Court judgment dated 2 April 2013 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.
“Further since the factum of demand, acceptance and recovery of Rs.200/- as bribe has been proved beyond reasonable doubt. Further in view of acceptance being proved the presumption is raised against the Appellant under Section 20 of the PC Act …” (para 11)
Separate from verification
Institutional response
2 Apr 2013
Order issued
ConcludedThe Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the convictions of police personnel.
Conviction · Supports allegation (appellate affirmance; trial conviction separate card).
Source: (2013) 4 AD 492 : (2013) 2 JCC 1143
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.