Date not established
Conviction
ConcludedThe trial court convicted the accused police personnel, as recorded in the Madras High Court judgment.
Conviction · Supports allegation.
Source: Crl.A.(MD) Nos.298 and 300 of 2011
Not yet re-checked.
CW-2019-0024Tirunelveli, Tamil NaduJudgment 22 January 2019
Tirunelveli Resident and [name withheld] vs Inspector of Police, Vigilance and Anti-Corruption, Tirunelveli
The Madras High Court (Madurai) dismissed the criminal appeals of [name withheld] (A-1) and [name withheld] (A-2) and confirmed their conviction and sentence of three years rigorous imprisonment plus Rs.2,500 fine each for demanding and accepting a Rs.1,000 bribe for a petition enquiry. The court held demand, acceptance and recovery proved through PW.1 to PW.4, PW.14, PW.16 and the exhibits: A-1 demanded the bribe, A-2 received the cash inside the police station on 11.01.2000 during a DVAC trap, and the phenolphthalein test proved positive. It held sanction valid and the trial court's appreciation of evidence correct, confirming the 14.11.2011 judgment of the Special Judge, Tirunelveli in full. Ranks and the station name are not stated in the judgment; A-3's acquittal was left undisturbed.
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 22 January 2019 in Crl.A.(MD) Nos.298 and 300 of 2011, the Madras High Court (Coram: P. Velmurugan, J.) affirmed the conviction of 2 police personnel, namely: Police personnel; Police personnel.
- Register number
- TN 69 CW 0006
- Case reference
- Crl.A.(MD) Nos.298 and 300 of 2011
- Court and date
- Madras High Court (Coram: P. Velmurugan, J.), 22 January 2019
- Officer(s) at the material time
- Police personnel; Police personnel
- Present service status
- Not ascertained from the cited sources.
- Provisions invoked
- Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988; Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988
- Finding of the Court (extract)
- “In view of the foregoing discussion, from the evidence of PW.1, PW.2, PW.3, PW.4 and PW.14 and PW.16 along with Ex.P.1, Ex.P.2, Ex.P.9 and Ex.P.10 Ex.P.18 Ex.P.32, this Court finds that the prosecution has proved its case that the appellant …” (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 Madras High Court judgment dated 22 January 2019 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.
“In view of the foregoing discussion, from the evidence of PW.1, PW.2, PW.3, PW.4 and PW.14 and PW.16 along with Ex.P.1, Ex.P.2, Ex.P.9 and Ex.P.10 Ex.P.18 Ex.P.32, this Court finds that the prosecution has proved its case that the appellant …” (para 31)
Separate from verification
Institutional response
22 Jan 2019
Order issued
ConcludedThe Madras High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the convictions of police personnel.
Conviction · Supports allegation (appellate affirmance; trial conviction separate card).
Source: Crl.A.(MD) Nos.298 and 300 of 2011
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.