Date not established
Conviction
ConcludedThe trial court convicted the accused police personnel, as recorded in the Delhi High Court judgment.
Conviction · Supports allegation.
Source: Crl.A. No. 129/2003
Not yet re-checked.
CW-2011-0041South West Delhi, DelhiJudgment 30 September 2011
Delhi Police Sub-Inspector vs CBI
The judgment of the Delhi High Court records the following account. SI, in charge of the Rangpuri Hills area, demanded Rs 10,000 per month from stone-chips dealer a Vasant Kunj man to let his truck business run unimpeded, and accepted a Rs 3,000 instalment inside his room at Vasant Kunj police station in a CBI trap on 9 March 1995. The Special Judge convicted him under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) of the PC Act with three years RI per count in February 2003. The Delhi High Court held demand, acceptance and recovery proved by the complainant, shadow witness and trap officer with matching notes and positive phenolphthalein washes, despite hostile independent witnesses. It dismissed the appeal as without merit, cancelled bail and ordered the accused taken into custody forthwith.
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 30 September 2011 in Crl.A. No. 129/2003, the Delhi High Court (Coram: Rajiv Shakdher, J.) affirmed the conviction of the Sub-Inspector, Delhi Police, Vasant Kunj Police Station.
- Register number
- DL 09 CW 0009
- Case reference
- Crl.A. No. 129/2003
- Court and date
- Delhi High Court (Coram: Rajiv Shakdher, J.), 30 September 2011
- Officer(s) at the material time
- Sub-Inspector, Delhi Police, Vasant Kunj Police Station
- Present service status
- Not ascertained from the cited sources.
- Provisions invoked
- Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988; Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988
- Finding of the Court (extract)
- “For the reasons given hereinabove, I am of the view that the appeal is without merit and hence, consequently deserves to be dismissed. It is ordered accordingly. Resultantly, the accused shall be taken into custody forthwith.” (at para 31)
- Verdict, sentence and quantum
- Conviction upheld. Sentence: imprisonment and fine; maximum substantive term of 3 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 30 September 2011 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.
“For the reasons given hereinabove, I am of the view that the appeal is without merit and hence, consequently deserves to be dismissed. It is ordered accordingly. Resultantly, the accused shall be taken into custody forthwith.” (para 31)
Separate from verification
Institutional response
30 Sep 2011
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: Crl.A. No. 129/2003
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.