अब आप न्यूज्ड हिंदी में पढ़ सकते हैं। यहाँ क्लिक करें
Home » Beyond Metros » Twenty-four years after conviction in Rs 350 graft case, Bombay HC acquits ex-cop sentenced to one year in jail

Twenty-four years after conviction in Rs 350 graft case, Bombay HC acquits ex-cop sentenced to one year in jail

The Maharashtra Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) had booked Damu Avhad, who was a sub-inspector at the time, under the Prevention of Corruption Act in 1988 for allegedly demanding a bribe of Rs 350.

By Newsd
Published on :
Madhya Pradesh: Convict chops off private parts, offers it to prison temple

Twenty-four years after being convicted and sentenced to a year in jail in a bribery case, a former policeman was acquitted by the Bombay High Court, which observed that the prosecution had failed to prove the factum of acceptance of Rs 350 bribe money.

The Maharashtra Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) had booked Damu Avhad, who was a sub-inspector at the time, under the Prevention of Corruption Act in 1988 for allegedly demanding a bribe of Rs 350.

In August 1998, a special court in Nashik convicted Avhad and sentenced him to a year in jail. The accused policeman had then filed an appeal in the high court the same year.

A single bench of Justice V G Bisht on Thursday passed an order noting that the mere recovery of tainted money is not sufficient to convict the accused and that the prosecution has not proved the case against Avhad.

A copy of the order was made available on Friday.

The court acquitted Avhad, who was posted as a sub-inspector at Yeola taluka police station in Nashik district at the time.

According to the prosecution, in March 1988 Avhad had demanded Rs 350 from a man for granting bail to his brother. The person then approached the ACB and lodged a complaint, following which the ACB laid a trap and after the complainant paid the bribe amount, it arrested Avhad and recovered the Rs 350 bribe amount from him.

The court, while acquitting Avhad, said, “Mere receipt of amount by the accused is not sufficient to fasten the guilt in absence of any evidence with regard to demand and acceptance of the amount as illegal gratification.” The bench further observed that the complainant was asked to pay the money in order to release his brother on bail and that the person drew inferences that Avhad was seeking illegal gratification.

Justice Bisht noted that there was no evidence to prove that Avhad had made any specific demand of illegal gratification from the complainant.

Related