Date not established
Conviction
ConcludedThe trial court convicted the accused police personnel, as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment.
Conviction · Supports allegation.
Source: Crl.A. 15/2000
Not yet re-checked.
CW-2015-0016East Delhi, DelhiJudgment 21 September 2015
Seelampur Police Head Constable (Reader to Special Executive Magistrate) vs C.B.I.
The judgment of the Delhi High Court records the following account. Head Constable, Reader to the Special Executive Magistrate at Seelampur, demanded Rs.1,000 from complainant [name withheld] for cancellation of non-bailable warrants in Section 107/151 CrPC proceedings and signed a warrant-cancellation robkar bearing the SEM seal though the Magistrate had passed no such order. The CBI trap recovered the tainted money from his pant, and a handwriting expert proved his signature on the slip. The trial court convicted him in December 1999 under Sections 7 and 13(2)/13(1)(d) of the PC Act (2 years RI each). The High Court confirmed guilt but reduced each term to one year RI with fine, concurrent, noting the 20-year ordeal and loss of service, with surrender in two weeks. Incident month August 1995 only; day not stated.
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 21 September 2015 in Crl.A. 15/2000, the Delhi High Court (Coram: Suresh Kait, J.) affirmed the conviction of the Head Constable (Reader to Special Executive Magistrate), SEM Court, Seelampur.
- Register number
- DL 07 CW 0013
- Case reference
- Crl.A. 15/2000
- Court and date
- Delhi High Court (Coram: Suresh Kait, J.), 21 September 2015
- Officer(s) at the material time
- Head Constable (Reader to Special Executive Magistrate), SEM Court, Seelampur
- Present service status
- Not ascertained from the cited sources.
- Provisions invoked
- Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988; Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988
- Finding of the Court (extract)
- “no discrepancy in the impugned judgment dated 14.12.1999 whereby the appellant was held guilty for the charged offences.” (at para 44)
- Verdict, sentence and quantum
- Conviction upheld. Sentence: imprisonment; maximum substantive term of 1 year.
- 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 21 September 2015 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.
“no discrepancy in the impugned judgment dated 14.12.1999 whereby the appellant was held guilty for the charged offences.” (para 44)
Separate from verification
Institutional response
21 Sep 2015
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: Crl.A. 15/2000
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.