{
 "record_id": "CW-2014-0027",
 "status": "current",
 "merged_id": "CWC-0791",
 "alias_merged_ids": [],
 "display_title": "Delhi Police Sub-Inspector and others vs Central Bureau of Investigation",
 "display_title_redacted": "Delhi Police Sub-Inspector and others vs Central Bureau of Investigation",
 "state": "Delhi",
 "district": "West",
 "district_at_time": null,
 "city_town": "Delhi",
 "police_station_or_unit": "PS Mayapuri",
 "court": "Delhi High Court",
 "court_as_verified": "Delhi High Court",
 "bench": null,
 "case_title": "Delhi Police Sub-Inspector and others vs Central Bureau of Investigation",
 "case_number": "CRL.A. No. 164 of 2009",
 "citation": null,
 "judges": [
  "S. Muralidhar"
 ],
 "judgment_date": "2014-05-30",
 "date_precision": "day",
 "judgment_year": 2014,
 "incident_date": "2001-07-10",
 "incident_year": 2001,
 "category": "Other",
 "admin_category": "corruption",
 "admin_subcategory": "bribery_pc_act",
 "subcategory": "bribery_pc_act",
 "subcategory_display": "bribery pc act",
 "protest_override_heuristic": false,
 "outcome_type": "conviction_upheld",
 "sections": [
  "PC Act 1988 s.7",
  "PC Act 1988 s.13(1)(d) r/w s.13(2)"
 ],
 "officers": [
  {
   "name": null,
   "rank": "Sub-Inspector",
   "role": "convicted",
   "unit": "PS Mayapuri, Delhi Police (IO, FIR No. 110/01)",
   "publish_grade": "unnamed",
   "gate_reasons": [
    "ledger:no_row",
    "key2:no_row"
   ],
   "ledger_role": null,
   "key2": null,
   "key2_agy": null,
   "key2_claude": null,
   "key2_union": null,
   "key2_gemapi": null,
   "key2_openrouter": null,
   "key2_gpt56": null,
   "grok": null,
   "jev_risk": null,
   "jev_p_culpable": null,
   "key2_gpt": null,
   "later_outcome": null,
   "name_public": null,
   "display": "Sub-Inspector, PS Mayapuri, Delhi Police (IO, FIR No. 110/01)"
  }
 ],
 "officer_count": 1,
 "victims": [
  {
   "age": null,
   "gender": null,
   "name": null,
   "descriptor": "Delhi resident"
  }
 ],
 "victims_redacted": null,
 "anonymised": false,
 "victim_count": 1,
 "sentence_type": "mixed",
 "sentence_max_years": 3,
 "compensation_inr": null,
 "force": "state_police",
 "primary_source_url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/49216877/",
 "secondary_sources": [],
 "summary": "The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal of Delhi Police Sub-Inspector [name withheld] and confirmed his conviction for demanding and accepting an Rs.8,000 bribe from complainant [name withheld] for not arresting him in a cross-case. The CBI trap on 10 July 2001 recovered the treated notes from the officer, and both his hand washes turned pink. The court held that the collective reading of the evidence of PWs 2 and 4 proved conscious demand and acceptance beyond reasonable doubt, attracting the presumption under Section 20 PC Act. It rejected the defences of planted money and defective procedure and held the 3-year RI sentence not disproportionate, cancelling bail bonds with surrender ordered. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.",
 "summary_verified": "The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal of Delhi Police Sub-Inspector [name withheld] and confirmed his conviction for demanding and accepting an Rs.8,000 bribe from complainant [name withheld] for not arresting him in a cross-case. The CBI trap on 10 July 2001 recovered the treated notes from the officer, and both his hand washes turned pink. The court held that the collective reading of the evidence of PWs 2 and 4 proved conscious demand and acceptance beyond reasonable doubt, attracting the presumption under Section 20 PC Act. It rejected the defences of planted money and defective procedure and held the 3-year RI sentence not disproportionate, cancelling bail bonds with surrender ordered.",
 "court_quote": "The Court is of the view that a collective reading of the evidence of PWs 2 and 4 is sufficient to draw the conclusion regarding the conscious acceptance of the bribe amount by the Appellant. With both the elements i.e. conscious demand and conscious acceptance being proved by the prosecution in the above manner beyond reasonable doubt, the presumption under Section 20 of the PC Act was certainly attracted in the present case.",
 "court_quote_para": "33",
 "confidence": "high",
 "verdict": "accept",
 "verdict_note": "HC judgment verified; SI bribery conviction and 3-year sentence confirmed.",
 "verification_status": "V2",
 "verification_badge": "V2 · Externally reported",
 "tier_badge": "Externally reported",
 "tier": "Tier A — Externally reported or officially recorded",
 "tier_history": [
  "Tier A — Externally reported or officially recorded"
 ],
 "allegations": [
  {
   "category": "Other",
   "primary": true,
   "position": "Material fact supported",
   "position_explainer": "Reliable material supports a specifically documented fact relevant to that allegation, not necessarily the full allegation, causation, intent, unlawfulness, or responsibility.",
   "official_finding_relation": "supports allegation"
  }
 ],
 "institutional_response": [
  {
   "date": null,
   "action_type": "Conviction",
   "status": "Concluded",
   "authority": "Trial court (as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment)",
   "independence": "External",
   "legal_effect": "Binding",
   "description": "The trial court convicted the accused police personnel, as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment.",
   "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation",
   "source": "CRL.A. No. 164 of 2009",
   "recheck": "Not yet re-checked."
  },
  {
   "date": "2014-05-30",
   "action_type": "Order issued",
   "status": "Concluded",
   "authority": "Delhi High Court",
   "independence": "External",
   "legal_effect": "Binding",
   "description": "The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the convictions of police personnel.",
   "disposition": "Conviction · Supports allegation (appellate affirmance; trial conviction separate card)",
   "source": "CRL.A. No. 164 of 2009",
   "recheck": "Not yet re-checked."
  }
 ],
 "later_proceedings": [],
 "final_outcome_url": null,
 "followup_history": [
  {
   "date": "2026-09-19",
   "scope": "Round-8 full re-verification: published record re-checked against the judgment text (outcome, officers, quote, key facts) plus methodology-compliance pass",
   "method": "skills-guided adversarial re-verification of the published record against the judgment text (reverify/t1-*/adversarial-8.jsonl)",
   "result": "wrong_facts",
   "corrections_applied": []
  }
 ],
 "followup_status": "checked",
 "last_checked": "2026-09-19",
 "link_checked_per_url": [
  {
   "url": "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/49216877/",
   "link_checked": null
  }
 ],
 "source_assessment": {
  "established": null,
  "basis": null
 },
 "v3_basis": null,
 "publication_basis": null,
 "reviews": [],
 "retracted": {
  "is_retracted": false
 },
 "fidelity_checked": true,
 "verified_by": [
  "chunk-60"
 ],
 "merged_case_id": "GAP2-19-002",
 "officers_named_public": 0,
 "record_flag": null,
 "service": "police",
 "watch": "babuwatch"
}