Woman ASI acquitted in bribery case

NT Correspondent

Bengaluru: A woman assistant sub-inspector of police, who was convicted of accepting a bribe of Rs 1 lakh by a trial court in 2015, has been acquitted by the High Court of Karnataka. The HC found that a departmental enquiry on the same issue had exonerated her and therefore a criminal proceeding on the same set of facts cannot be allowed to continue.

“The enquiry report clearly reveals that departmental enquiry was initiated on the same set of facts based on which criminal prosecution was also launched. Witnesses are same. The enquiry report was given on May 17, 2017 and the impugned judgment was passed on 19 Novemver, 2017. If enquiry report has been brought to the notice of the trial court, probably it would have taken a different view to acquit the accused,” the HC said acquitting her.

Rajalakshmi, the ASI working in Vanitha Helping Centre, Malleshwaram Police Station, was accused of demanding Rs 2 lakh from a person. A woman named Gowramma was filing several complaints against that person and Rajalakshmi promised to close those complaints in exchange for a bribe.

She was trapped accepting Rs 1 lakh near the Circle Maramma temple on September 17, 2014. The XXIII Additional City Civil and Sessions court convicted her under Section 7 and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. She approached the HC against this conviction. Justice Sreenivas Harish Kumar gave his judgment on October 17.

Citing the Supreme Court, the HC said that “criminal prosecution on the same set of facts and circumstances cannot be allowed to continue. Therefore, I arrive at a conclusion that this appeal deserves to be allowed.”

The accused faced departmental enquiry as an aftermath of the trap. She was exonerated of the charges leveled against her in the departmental enquiry. The final report of the enquiry exonerated her. Referring to the report, the advocate for the accused argued that in view of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Ashoo Surendranath Tewari Vs Deputy Superintendent of Police, the enquiry report is to be considered for acquitting the accused.

The government advocate however argued that “the standard of proof required in departmental enquiry being less, exoneration of a public servant of charges in a department enquiry has least impact on criminal prosecution and in support his argument her referred to the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Radheshyam Kejriwal Vs State of West Bengal.”

The HC rejected the arguments of Rajalakshmi’s advocate that there was no demand of bribe and there was no official work pending before her with regard to the complainant and therefore she should be acquitted. The HC said “a clear inference can be drawn that the accused did demand for bribe.”

The HC also said that “it is immaterial whether she had the authority to close the file or not. Therefore there is ample evidence in this regard too.” Even the Phenolphthalein test answered positive for the right hand wash of the accused. She had touched the bribe amount which was spiked with her hand. However, on the point that the departmental enquiry had let her off, the HC acquitted her in the criminal case too stating in its order, “Criminal Appeal is allowed.