Bribery Accused Caught Red-Handed, Yet Acquitted: Delhi High Court to Re-Examine Trial Court’s Verdict

“Corruption Cases Cannot Be Dismissed on Technicalities” – Delhi High Court has granted the State (NCT of Delhi) leave to appeal against the acquittal of Ashok Kumar Dahiya in a bribery case, stating that the trial court’s evaluation of evidence requires judicial reconsideration. The case involves allegations under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, where the accused was allegedly caught red-handed accepting a bribe of ₹10,000.

Delivering the order in CRL.L.P. 23/2021, Justice Neena Bansal Krishna observed that the trial court may not have properly appreciated the prosecution’s evidence, particularly when the accused was apprehended in a trap operation. The Court stated that “in cases of corruption, judicial scrutiny must ensure that acquittals are based on legal principles rather than mere technicalities.”

Background: A Trap Operation Leads to Bribery Allegations

The case originated from an FIR No. 17/2013, registered at Police Station ACB, Delhi, where Ashok Kumar Dahiya was accused of demanding and accepting a bribe. The Anti-Corruption Branch (ACB) conducted a trap operation, during which the accused was allegedly caught red-handed accepting ₹10,000.

The prosecution filed the chargesheet on January 6, 2018, and the court took cognizance on March 19, 2018. A supplementary chargesheet was filed on October 30, 2018, and the accused was formally charged under Sections 7, 13(1)(d), read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, on January 3, 2019.

Despite these allegations, the Special Judge, ACB, acquitted the accused on January 15, 2020, leading the State to challenge the verdict, arguing that the trial court failed to consider crucial evidence that established the accused’s culpability.

Delhi High Court Finds Grounds to Re-Evaluate Trial Court’s Findings

The High Court noted that the acquittal was based on an interpretation of evidence that might require further judicial scrutiny. The prosecution contended that:

The accused was caught red-handed accepting the bribe.

There was clear evidence of prior demand for illegal gratification.

The sanction for prosecution was duly obtained, countering any procedural lapses.

Justice Neena Bansal Krishna observed that “when an accused is apprehended in a trap case, the trial court must provide compelling reasons for an acquittal, ensuring that the decision is not based on a hyper-technical reading of evidence.”

Final Order: High Court Admits Appeal Against Acquittal for Detailed Hearing

Allowing the State’s leave to appeal, the Delhi High Court ruled that the matter requires further examination. The case has now been converted into a criminal appeal, set to be argued on March 24, 2025.

Justice Neena Bansal Krishna, concluding the order, stated that “corruption cases must be examined with a rigorous legal lens, ensuring that acquittals do not arise from misinterpretation of direct evidence.”

Conclusion: A Crucial Legal Scrutiny in Corruption Cases

The Delhi High Court’s decision to allow an appeal in State (NCT of Delhi) v. Ashok Kumar Dahiya underscores the judiciary’s duty to ensure that corruption trials are decided based on substantive evidence rather than technical lapses. The case now proceeds to the appellate stage, where the court will assess whether the trial court’s acquittal was legally justified or whether a re-evaluation of evidence is necessary.

Date of decision: 19/03/2025