# Delhi Police Assistant Sub-Inspector vs State (CBI)

HTML version: [https://datalibertarian.in/babuwatch/incident/CW-2009-0028](https://datalibertarian.in/babuwatch/incident/CW-2009-0028)

## Report card

By judgment dated 31 July 2009 in Crl.A. No. 73/2001, the Delhi High Court (Coram: G.S. Sistani, J.) affirmed the conviction of the Assistant Sub-Inspector, Delhi Police, Police Station Vinay Nagar.

- Register number: DL 03 CW 0006
- Case reference: Crl.A. No. 73/2001 / (2009) 07 DEL CK 0398
- Court and date: Delhi High Court (Coram: G.S. Sistani, J.), 31 July 2009
- Officer(s) at the material time: Assistant Sub-Inspector, Delhi Police, Police Station Vinay Nagar
- Present service status: Not ascertained from the cited sources.
- Provisions invoked: Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988; Section 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988
- Finding of the Court (extract): “I am of the considered opinion that a clear cut case is made out against the appellant of having demanded the illegal gratification in terms of money (Rs. 1,000/-) and having accepted the same.” (at para 42)
- 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.
- Source orders: [Judgment / order (primary source)](https://www.courtkutchehry.com/judgements/910073/darshan-lal-vs-state-cbi/); [Permanent link to this record](https://datalibertarian.in/babuwatch/incident/CW-2009-0028)

**Record:** CW-2009-0028 (compiler id CWC-1178); case GAP3-40-002
**Title:** Delhi Police Assistant Sub-Inspector vs State (CBI)
**Court:** Delhi High Court; judges: G.S. Sistani
**Case number / citation:** Crl.A. No. 73/2001 / (2009) 07 DEL CK 0398
**Judgment:** 2009-07-31 (2009, day precision)
**Incident date:** 1995-09-21 (1995)
**Place:** South Delhi, Delhi; city town: Vinay Nagar; police station or unit: Police Station Vinay Nagar; force: state_police
**Category:** Bribery & extortion
**Sub-category:** bribery pc act
**Outcome:** Conviction upheld (conviction_upheld)
**Sections:** PC Act 1988 s.7; PC Act 1988 s.13(1)(d) r/w s.13(2)
**Officers (gated display forms):** Assistant Sub-Inspector, Delhi Police, Police Station Vinay Nagar (1 in record)
**Victims:** Vinay Nagar man; Vinay Nagar man; Vinay Nagar man (3 in record)
**Sentence / compensation:** mixed; max 2 yrs
**Sentence type:** mixed (mixed)

The judgment of the Delhi High Court records the following account. ASI of PS Vinay Nagar demanded Rs 1,000 from a Vinay Nagar man to release his detained cousin and friend, threatening to plant a knife on them, and was caught in a CBI trap on 21 September 1995. The Special Judge convicted him under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d)/13(2) of the PC Act in January 2001. The Delhi High Court held the complainant's account of demand and acceptance was corroborated by the shadow witness, recovery witness and trap officer, and rejected challenges to sanction and minor contradictions. It sustained the conviction but reduced the Section 13(1)(d)/13(2) sentence from three to two years RI given the 14-year pendency, and dismissed the appeal.

> I am of the considered opinion that a clear cut case is made out against the appellant of having demanded the illegal gratification in terms of money (Rs. 1,000/-) and having accepted the same.

**Sources (2):** [courtkutchehry.com](https://www.courtkutchehry.com/judgements/910073/darshan-lal-vs-state-cbi/); [indiankanoon.org](https://indiankanoon.org/doc/13075717/)
**Verification:** V2 · Externally reported
**Review:** Solo Staff combined review (one combined attestation) — not yet recorded
**admin category:** corruption
**admin subcategory:** bribery_pc_act
**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'}
**anonymised:** False
**court quote para:** 42
**display title redacted:** Delhi Police Assistant Sub-Inspector vs State (CBI)
**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': 'holds', 'corrections_applied': \[\]}
**followup status:** checked
**institutional response:** {'date': None, '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': '(2009) 07 DEL CK 0398', 'recheck': 'Not yet re-checked.'}; {'date': '2009-07-31', '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': '(2009) 07 DEL CK 0398', 'recheck': 'Not yet re-checked.'}
**last checked:** 2026-09-19
**link checked per url:** {'url': 'https://www.courtkutchehry.com/judgements/910073/darshan-lal-vs-state-cbi/', 'link_checked': None}; {'url': 'https://indiankanoon.org/doc/13075717/', 'link_checked': None}
**retracted:** {"is_retracted": false}
**service:** police
**source assessment:** {"established": null, "basis": null}
**status:** current
**subcategory display:** bribery pc act
**tier:** Tier A — Externally reported or officially recorded
**tier badge:** Externally reported
**tier history:** Tier A — Externally reported or officially recorded
**verdict:** accept
**verdict note:** HC judgment verified; conviction sustained, s.13 sentence reduced 3yr to 2yr (agent overstated sentence).
**verification badge:** V2 · Externally reported
**verification status:** V2
**watch:** babuwatch

Status: Conviction upheld.

[Open CW-2009-0028](https://datalibertarian.in/babuwatch/incident/CW-2009-0028)