4 Dec 1958
Order issued
ConcludedThe Bombay High Court entered convictions against police personnel in this judgment.
Conviction · Supports allegation.
Source: AIR 1959 Bom 543; (1959) 61 BomLR 837; 1959 CriLJ 1421
Not yet re-checked.
CW-1958-0004Ahilyanagar, MaharashtraJudgment 4 December 1958
State v. Rahata Police Constable and Anr.
The Bombay High Court allowed the State appeal against acquittal and reversed the Special Judge's acquittals in a bribery case where constable of Rahata acted as conduit for a Rs. 400 bribe demand on behalf of his father-in-law, the Special Executive Magistrate. The court held the Special Judge failed to examine the proved facts in the context of the statutory presumption and convicted the constable under s.165A IPC (6 months rigorous imprisonment) and the Magistrate under s.161 IPC (9 months RI plus Rs. 500 fine). It issued warrants for the arrest of both accused. The bribe was demanded at the Korhale fair on 30 September 1957 for an acquittal in chapter proceedings against a Rahata man Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.
Externally reportedV2
What this record means
This page documents a court-adjudicated case from the judgment and cited sources below. Findings are attributed to the court; this record does not add findings of its own.
How verification works →Detailed record
Report card
By judgment dated 4 December 1958 in State appeal against acquittal in Corruption Case No. 1 of 1958 (Special Judge, Ahmednagar), the Bombay High Court (Coram: Shah, J., J.) recorded the conviction of the Constable, Rahata, Ahmednagar district.
- Register number
- MH 16 CW 0001
- Case reference
- State appeal against acquittal in Corruption Case No. 1 of 1958 (Special Judge, Ahmednagar) / AIR 1959 Bom 543; (1959) 61 BomLR 837; 1959 CriLJ 1421
- Court and date
- Bombay High Court (Coram: Shah, J., J.), 4 December 1958
- Officer(s) at the material time
- Constable, Rahata, Ahmednagar district
- Present service status
- Not ascertained from the cited sources.
- Provisions invoked
- Section 161 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 165A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860
- Finding of the Court (extract)
- “We also convict the second accused for the offence under Section 165A of the Indian Penal Code and sentence him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months.” (at para 21)
- Verdict, sentence and quantum
- Conviction entered by High Court. Sentence: imprisonment; maximum substantive term of 0.5 years.
- Present status of the proceedings
- No further proceedings are recorded in the cited sources; the judgment is the concluded position shown.
Compiled from the judgment and the cited sources. Findings are those of the court; this card adds none of its own.
Current position
The Bombay High Court judgment dated 4 December 1958 is the concluded position shown in the cited sources.
Evidence position
Recorded allegations
OtherPrimary
Material fact supported
Reliable material supports a specifically documented fact relevant to that allegation, not necessarily the full allegation, causation, intent, unlawfulness, or responsibility.
Official finding: supports allegation.
Attributed to the court
What the court found
Holding not recorded separately.
“We also convict the second accused for the offence under Section 165A of the Indian Penal Code and sentence him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months.” (para 21)
Separate from verification
Institutional response
Continuing record
Follow-up history
19 Sep 2026
(Round-8 full re-verification: published record re-checked against the judgment text (outcome, officers, quote, key facts) plus methodology-compliance pass; skills-guided adversarial re-verification of the published record against the judgment text (reverify/t1-*/adversarial-8.jsonl))
Corrections (0): No corrections recorded.
Review: Solo Staff combined review (one combined attestation) — not yet recorded.