The Delhi High Court recorded that an Assistant Sub-Inspector (Ministerial) in the Sports Cell of CISF Headquarters, New Delhi, handling the kit allowance of a CISF Inspector who had coached the Indian junior judo team at an Asian championship in Doha, demanded Rs. 5,000 to release the Rs. 10,000 cheque and was caught by the CBI on 28.10.2004 accepting Rs. 3,000. The Special Judge, CBI, Patiala House Courts convicted him on 20.04.2010 under Sections 7 and 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and sentenced him to two years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 5,000 on each count, concurrently. On 22.09.2026, sixteen years after the appeal was filed, the High Court rejected his defence that the money was repayment of a loan, upheld the conviction and directed him to surrender to serve the sentence.
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 →By judgment dated 22 September 2026 in CRL.A. 578/2010, the Delhi High Court (Coram: Vimal Kumar Yadav, J.) affirmed the conviction of the Assistant Sub-Inspector (Ministerial), Sports Cell, CISF Headquarters, New Delhi.
Compiled from the judgment and the cited sources. Findings are those of the court; this card adds none of its own.
Judgment dated 22 September 2026. This judgment may still be subject to appeal; initiation or pendency of an appeal is not a finding.
A court has made a finding on this allegation.
Official finding: supports allegation.
Holding not recorded separately.
“The conviction of the Appellant under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, is accordingly upheld.” (para 53)
The High Court dismissed the appeal, upheld the 2010 conviction under Sections 7 and 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of the PC Act, and directed the appellant to surrender to serve two years' rigorous imprisonment.
(Copwatch convictions sweep (5 Oct): record written from the judgment text on Indian Kanoon; quote checked verbatim; the officer and the complainant are not named.)
Corrections (0): No corrections recorded.
Review: Solo Staff combined review (one combined attestation) — not yet recorded.
These records are listed together because they share a state or a topic. That does not mean they are connected.
