# Delhi Police Sub-Inspector and others vs Central Bureau of Investigation

HTML version: [https://datalibertarian.in/babuwatch/incident/CW-2014-0027](https://datalibertarian.in/babuwatch/incident/CW-2014-0027)

## Report card

By judgment dated 30 May 2014 in CRL.A. No. 164 of 2009, the Delhi High Court (Coram: S. Muralidhar, J.) affirmed the conviction of the Sub-Inspector, PS Mayapuri, Delhi Police (IO, FIR No. 110/01).

- Register number: DL 04 CW 0019
- Case reference: CRL.A. No. 164 of 2009
- Court and date: Delhi High Court (Coram: S. Muralidhar, J.), 30 May 2014
- Officer(s) at the material time: Sub-Inspector, PS Mayapuri, Delhi Police (IO, FIR No. 110/01)
- 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): “The Court is of the view that a collective reading of the evidence of PWs 2 and 4 is sufficient to draw the conclusion regarding the conscious acceptance of the bribe amount by the Appellant. With both the elements i.e. …” (at para 33)
- 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.
- Source orders: [Judgment / order (primary source)](https://indiankanoon.org/doc/49216877/); [Permanent link to this record](https://datalibertarian.in/babuwatch/incident/CW-2014-0027)

**Record:** CW-2014-0027 (compiler id CWC-0791); case GAP2-19-002
**Title:** Delhi Police Sub-Inspector and others vs Central Bureau of Investigation
**Court:** Delhi High Court; judges: S. Muralidhar
**Case number / citation:** CRL.A. No. 164 of 2009
**Judgment:** 2014-05-30 (2014, day precision)
**Incident date:** 2001-07-10 (2001)
**Place:** West, Delhi; city town: Delhi; police station or unit: PS Mayapuri; 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):** Sub-Inspector, PS Mayapuri, Delhi Police (IO, FIR No. 110/01) (1 in record)
**Victims:** Delhi resident (1 in record)
**Sentence / compensation:** mixed; max 3 yrs
**Sentence type:** mixed (mixed)

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal of Delhi Police Sub-Inspector \[name withheld\] and confirmed his conviction for demanding and accepting an Rs.8,000 bribe from complainant \[name withheld\] for not arresting him in a cross-case. The CBI trap on 10 July 2001 recovered the treated notes from the officer, and both his hand washes turned pink. The court held that the collective reading of the evidence of PWs 2 and 4 proved conscious demand and acceptance beyond reasonable doubt, attracting the presumption under Section 20 PC Act. It rejected the defences of planted money and defective procedure and held the 3-year RI sentence not disproportionate, cancelling bail bonds with surrender ordered. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.

> The Court is of the view that a collective reading of the evidence of PWs 2 and 4 is sufficient to draw the conclusion regarding the conscious acceptance of the bribe amount by the Appellant. With both the elements i.e. conscious demand and conscious acceptance being proved by the prosecution in the above manner beyond reasonable doubt, the presumption under Section 20 of the PC Act was certainly attracted in the present case.

**Sources (1):** [indiankanoon.org](https://indiankanoon.org/doc/49216877/)
**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:** 33
**display title redacted:** Delhi Police Sub-Inspector and others vs Central Bureau of Investigation
**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': 'wrong_facts', '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': 'CRL.A. No. 164 of 2009', 'recheck': 'Not yet re-checked.'}; {'date': '2014-05-30', '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': 'CRL.A. No. 164 of 2009', 'recheck': 'Not yet re-checked.'}
**last checked:** 2026-09-19
**link checked per url:** {'url': 'https://indiankanoon.org/doc/49216877/', '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; SI bribery conviction and 3-year sentence confirmed.
**verification badge:** V2 · Externally reported
**verification status:** V2
**watch:** babuwatch

Status: Conviction upheld.

[Open CW-2014-0027](https://datalibertarian.in/babuwatch/incident/CW-2014-0027)