-
by sayum
18 February 2026 8:14 AM
In a recent decision, Justice Jasmeet Singh overturned a bribery conviction, citing that the prosecution failed to establish the foundational facts of “demand and acceptance” of the bribe. The ruling has significant implications for how bribery cases are prosecuted in the future.
The appellant had been convicted by a trial court for allegedly accepting a bribe. The case hinged on the testimony of the complainant, referred to as PW6 in court documents, who had multiple criminal antecedents. “The evidence of PW6 does not inspire confidence and is uncorroborated by any other witnesses,” observed Justice Singh in the judgement.
The court also noted that another witness, PW7, did not support the prosecution’s case, making it “unsafe to convict the appellant solely on the testimony of the complainant.”
One of the key points in the judgement was the misuse of the presumption under Section 20 of the Act by the trial court. Justice Singh pointed out that “presumption under section 20 of the Act will only arise once the foundational facts i.e., demand and acceptance are proved.???
As a result of these findings, the appellate court allowed the criminal appeal and set aside the conviction and sentence recorded by the learned Special Judge, Delhi in Case No. 283/1994. “It leaves no manner of doubt that the prosecution in the instant case has failed to prove the demand and acceptance of bribe either through direct or indirect evidence,” concluded Justice Singh.
The sentence was already suspended, and a copy of the order will be communicated to the concerned jail Superintendent and the Trial Court.
Date of Decision: September 01, 2023
MAHAL SINGH vs STATE OF DELHI
