Conviction
ConcludedThe trial court convicted the accused police personnel, as recorded in the Supreme Court of India judgment.
The Supreme Court dismissed SI 's appeal and finally upheld his conviction by the Special Judge (CBI), Delhi (CC 194/2001) and confirmed by the Delhi High Court (CRL.A. 326/2008), under Sections 7 and 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The Court recorded that as a Sub-Inspector he demanded a bribe of Rs. 25,000 for releasing the nephew of the complainant, and the CBI Anti-Corruption Branch laid a trap on 13 January 2001. It analysed the penology of corruption offences, held the Act gives no scope for reform-based leniency, and observed that the keeper entrusted with law enforcement had become the poacher. The Court confirmed two years' rigorous imprisonment with a Rs. 15,000 fine on each count. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.
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 →By judgment dated 7 April 2015 in Criminal Appeal No. 585 of 2015, the Supreme Court of India (Coram: T. S. Thakur, Kurian Joseph, R. Banumathi, JJ.) affirmed the conviction of the Sub-Inspector, P.S. Dabri.
Compiled from the judgment and the cited sources. Findings are those of the court; this card adds none of its own.
The Supreme Court of India judgment dated 7 April 2015 is the concluded position shown in the cited sources.
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.
Holding not recorded separately.
“As noticed by the High Court in the impugned judgment itself, the appellant was the sub-inspector of police entrusted with the task of law enforcement. The keeper had become the poacher. In such circumstances, we do not find any reason …” (para 22)
The trial court convicted the accused police personnel, as recorded in the Supreme Court of India judgment.
The Supreme Court of India dismissed the appeal and upheld the convictions of police personnel.
(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.
These records are listed together because they share a state or a topic. That does not mean they are connected.