Date not established
Conviction
ConcludedThe trial court convicted the accused police personnel, as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment.
Conviction · Supports allegation.
Source: (2002) 07 DEL CK 0047
Not yet re-checked.
CW-2002-0003Central Delhi, DelhiJudgment 2 July 2002
Delhi Police Assistant Sub-Inspector v. State
The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal of Assistant Sub-Inspector (pursued by his legal representative after his death), upholding his conviction by the Special Judge in Corruption Case No. 55/76. On the night of 6/7 August 1975, the ASI with four constables picked up three residents of Haider Kuli on the false pretext of arrest under the Defence of India Rules, confined them at Lahori Gate Police Station and demanded Rs 6,000 for their release, collecting Rs 800. The High Court found no infirmity in the trial court's appreciation of evidence and held the prosecution proved guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The sentence of two years' rigorous imprisonment each under Sections 161 and 384 IPC and the Prevention of Corruption Act, one year under Section 342 IPC, and fines of Rs 500 stood affirmed. 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 2 July 2002 in Criminal Appeal No. 102 of 1978, the Delhi High Court (Coram: R.S. Sodhi, J.) affirmed the conviction of the Assistant Sub-Inspector, P.S. Lahori Gate, Delhi Police.
- Register number
- DL 06 CW 0007
- Case reference
- Criminal Appeal No. 102 of 1978 / (2002) 07 DEL CK 0047
- Court and date
- Delhi High Court (Coram: R.S. Sodhi, J.), 2 July 2002
- Officer(s) at the material time
- Assistant Sub-Inspector, P.S. Lahori Gate, Delhi Police
- Present service status
- Not ascertained from the cited sources.
- Provisions invoked
- Section 161 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 342 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 384 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947; Section 5(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947
- Finding of the Court (extract)
- “I find that there is no material contradiction which can lead to the conclusion that PW-7, PW-8 and PW-13 are not trustworthy witnesses. If the statement of these witnesses is believed, I find that the prosecution has been able to …” (at para 8)
- Verdict, sentence and quantum
- Conviction upheld. Sentence: imprisonment and fine; maximum substantive term of 2 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 Delhi High Court judgment dated 2 July 2002 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.
“I find that there is no material contradiction which can lead to the conclusion that PW-7, PW-8 and PW-13 are not trustworthy witnesses. If the statement of these witnesses is believed, I find that the prosecution has been able to …” (para 8)
Separate from verification
Institutional response
2 Jul 2002
Order issued
ConcludedThe Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the convictions of police personnel.
Conviction · Supports allegation (appellate affirmance; trial conviction separate card).
Source: (2002) 07 DEL CK 0047
Not yet re-checked.
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.