# Tirunelveli Resident and \[name withheld\] vs Inspector of Police, Vigilance and Anti-Corruption, Tirunelveli

HTML version: [https://datalibertarian.in/babuwatch/incident/CW-2019-0024](https://datalibertarian.in/babuwatch/incident/CW-2019-0024)

## 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.
- Source orders: [Judgment / order (primary source)](https://indiankanoon.org/doc/75757661/); [Permanent link to this record](https://datalibertarian.in/babuwatch/incident/CW-2019-0024)

**Record:** CW-2019-0024 (compiler id CWC-1294); case GAP3-88-004
**Title:** Tirunelveli Resident and \[name withheld\] vs Inspector of Police, Vigilance and Anti-Corruption, Tirunelveli
**Court:** Madras High Court; bench: Madurai; judges: P. Velmurugan
**Case number / citation:** Crl.A.(MD) Nos.298 and 300 of 2011
**Judgment:** 2019-01-22 (2019, day precision)
**Incident date:** 2000-01-10 (2000)
**Place:** Tirunelveli, Tamil Nadu; 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(2) r/w s.13(1)(d)
**Officers (gated display forms):** Police personnel; Police personnel (2 in record)
**Victims:** Tirunelveli resident (1 in record)
**Sentence / compensation:** mixed; max 3 yrs
**Sentence type:** mixed (mixed)

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.

> 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 had demanded illegal gratification and accepted it and the same was recovered from the appellant. In other words, the demand, acceptance and recovery are proved.

**Sources (2):** [indiankanoon.org](https://indiankanoon.org/doc/75757661/); [indiankanoon.org](https://indiankanoon.org/doc/112597752/)
**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:** 31
**display title redacted:** Tirunelveli Resident and \[name withheld\] vs Inspector of Police, Vigilance and Anti-Corruption, Tirunelveli
**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 Madras High Court judgment)', 'independence': 'External', 'legal_effect': 'Binding', 'description': 'The trial court convicted the accused police personnel, as recorded in the Madras High Court judgment.', 'disposition': 'Conviction · Supports allegation', 'source': 'Crl.A.(MD) Nos.298 and 300 of 2011', 'recheck': 'Not yet re-checked.'}; {'date': '2019-01-22', 'action_type': 'Order issued', 'status': 'Concluded', 'authority': 'Madras High Court', 'independence': 'External', 'legal_effect': 'Binding', 'description': 'The Madras 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.(MD) Nos.298 and 300 of 2011', 'recheck': 'Not yet re-checked.'}
**last checked:** 2026-09-19
**link checked per url:** {'url': 'https://indiankanoon.org/doc/75757661/', 'link_checked': None}; {'url': 'https://indiankanoon.org/doc/112597752/', '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 dismissed both appeals; 3-year RI PC Act bribery convictions confirmed; ranks/station unstated.
**verification badge:** V2 · Externally reported
**verification status:** V2
**watch:** babuwatch

Status: Conviction upheld.

[Open CW-2019-0024](https://datalibertarian.in/babuwatch/incident/CW-2019-0024)