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. 897/2006
Not yet re-checked.
CW-2026-0015West Delhi, DelhiJudgment 15 April 2026
Delhi Police Head Constable vs State NCT of Delhi
The judgment of the Delhi High Court records the following account. Investigating motorcycle-theft Crime 296/1999, Head Constable of Patel Nagar Police Station withheld the recovered bike's registration certificate and on 3 April 2000 demanded and accepted Rs 300 for returning it; the complainant went to the CBI ACB the same day and a trap caught him red-handed at 4 pm. The Special Judge, Delhi convicted him under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read with 13(2) of the PC Act 1988, sentencing him to six months RI with Rs 1,000 fine and one year RI with Rs 2,000 fine, concurrent. The Delhi High Court held demand inferable from circumstances, with recovery, the phenolphthalein test and presence forming a complete chain. Finding no infirmity in the impugned judgment, the court 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 15 April 2026 in CRL.A. 897/2006, the Delhi High Court (Coram: Chandrasekharan Sudha, J.) affirmed the conviction of the Head Constable, Patel Nagar Police Station, Delhi Police.
- Register number
- DL 04 CW 0027
- Case reference
- CRL.A. 897/2006
- Court and date
- Delhi High Court (Coram: Chandrasekharan Sudha, J.), 15 April 2026
- Officer(s) at the material time
- Head Constable, Patel Nagar Police Station, 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)
- “In the case on hand, the prosecution has clearly established the demand and acceptance of illegal gratification through the consistent testimony of PW8 and the admission of payment by PW2. The recovery of tainted currency notes from the accused, along …” (at para 38)
- Verdict, sentence and quantum
- Conviction upheld. Sentence: imprisonment; maximum substantive term of 1 year.
- Present status of the proceedings
- The judgment is recent and may be subject to appeal; the pendency of an appeal is not a finding.
Compiled from the judgment and the cited sources. Findings are those of the court; this card adds none of its own.
Current position
Judgment dated 15 April 2026. This judgment may still be subject to appeal; initiation or pendency of an appeal is not a finding.
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.
“In the case on hand, the prosecution has clearly established the demand and acceptance of illegal gratification through the consistent testimony of PW8 and the admission of payment by PW2. The recovery of tainted currency notes from the accused, along …” (para 38)
Separate from verification
Institutional response
15 Apr 2026
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. 897/2006
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.