A person cannot be convicted solely based on a person's ethics or morals, but rather requires proof of the offence of corruption

Case: Sayaji Dashrath Kawade vs the State of Maharashtra

Bench: Single-judge Justice Shrikant Kulkarni

The Bombay High Court recently ruled that the Prevention of Corruption Act does not allow convictions based solely on a person's ethics or morals, but rather requires proof of the offence of corruption. The HC ruled the above while acquitting a telecommunications engineer in a corruption case.

The HC was hearing an appeal filed by one Sayaji Kawade (appellant) challenging his sentence of three years in prison.

As per the prosecution, the appellant was arrested after a trap was laid based on a complaint that he had demanded a bribe of ₹2,000 for the installation of a PCO booth.

It was noted by the Court that both the complainant and the panch witnesses had changed their tune and retracted their original statements.

The bench noted that these prime witnesses didn't speak anything regarding the demand and the acceptance of the bribe amount. Further referring to the rulings of the Top Court, the bench said that in the absence of proof that illegal gratification has been sought or that corrupt or illegal means have been used to gain a pecuniary advantage, these offences cannot be established. An offence cannot be committed simply by possessing or recovering currency notes. 

According to the Court, even the mandatory sanction in the present case was invalid since the concerned authority did not follow due procedure.

 Therefore, the HC set aside the conviction orders of a special court.