Date not established
Conviction
ConcludedThe trial court convicted the accused police personnel, as recorded in the Supreme Court of India judgment.
Conviction · Supports allegation.
Source: (2012) 8 SCC 527
Not yet re-checked.
CW-2012-0032Hassan, KarnatakaJudgment 31 July 2012
Konanur Police personnel vs State of Karnataka
The judgment of the Supreme Court of India records the following account. [name withheld], a police officer at Konanur Police Station (Hassan), allegedly demanded illegal gratification from villager a Konanur man to file a charge-sheet on a June 1993 boundary-dispute complaint; the Lokayukta laid a phenolphthalein trap on 28 June 1993 and the hand wash confirmed receipt of tainted notes. The trial court acquitted him on a vengeance-defence theory and minor discrepancies, but the Karnataka High Court reversed the acquittal and convicted him under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read with 13(2) of the PC Act with 3 months RI and a Rs 20,000 fine. The Supreme Court held demand and acceptance proved by the complainant and two independent trap witnesses and dismissed the appeal, while leaving the below-minimum sentence undisturbed since the State had not appealed it.
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 31 July 2012 in Criminal Appeal No. 1323 of 2007, the Supreme Court of India (Coram: A. K. Patnaik, Madan B. Lokur, JJ.) affirmed the conviction of the Police personnel, Konanur Police Station, Hassan district.
- Register number
- KA 13 CW 0002
- Case reference
- Criminal Appeal No. 1323 of 2007 / (2012) 8 SCC 527
- Court and date
- Supreme Court of India (Coram: A. K. Patnaik, Madan B. Lokur, JJ.), 31 July 2012
- Officer(s) at the material time
- Police personnel, Konanur Police Station, Hassan district
- 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)
- “It is while undertaking this exercise that we find from the evidence of the witnesses that there was sufficient evidence of [name withheld] demanding illegal gratification from a Konanur man and receiving and accepting it when given by him.” (at para n/a)
- Verdict, sentence and quantum
- Conviction upheld. Sentence: imprisonment and fine; maximum substantive term of 0.25 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 Supreme Court of India judgment dated 31 July 2012 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.
“It is while undertaking this exercise that we find from the evidence of the witnesses that there was sufficient evidence of [name withheld] demanding illegal gratification from a Konanur man and receiving and accepting it when given by him.” (para n/a)
Separate from verification
Institutional response
31 Jul 2012
Order issued
ConcludedThe Supreme Court of India dismissed the appeal and upheld the convictions of police personnel.
Conviction · Supports allegation (appellate affirmance; trial conviction separate card).
Source: (2012) 8 SCC 527
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.