State (Vigilance) v. West Singhbhum Police Inspector of Police
The Jharkhand High Court records that [name withheld], a police inspector posted at Chakradharpur, demanded Rs.5,000 bribe from a P.H.[name withheld] (after earlier taking Rs.10,000), was caught in a Vigilance trap on 26.02.1991, and was convicted by the Special Judge, Vigilance, Ranchi on 20.09.2003 in Special Case No.7 of 1991. His separate appeal (Cr. Appeal (SJ) No.1421 of 2003) was still pending when the co-convicts' appeal was allowed in 2022; his conviction therefore stands as the trial court's finding.
This page documents a trial-court conviction from the cited sources below. It is not a High Court or Supreme Court finding; the conviction may have been appealed. Findings are attributed to the convicting court; this record does not add findings of its own.
How verification works →Report card
By judgment dated 20 September 2003, the Special Judge, Vigilance, Ranchi convicted the Inspector of Police, Chakradharpur Police Station, West Singhbhum (police station near whose premises his medicine-shop conduit sat, per judgment).
- Register number
- JH 06 CW 0001
- Case reference
- Special Case No.7 of 1991 (Vigilance trap 26-02-1991); Jharkhand HC Cr. Appeal (SJ) No.1422 of 2003 (judgment 21-04-2022)
- Court and date
- The Special Judge, Vigilance, Ranchi, 20 September 2003
- Officer(s) at the material time
- Inspector of Police, Chakradharpur Police Station, West Singhbhum (police station near whose premises his medicine-shop conduit sat, per judgment)
- Present service status
- Not ascertained from the cited sources.
- Provisions invoked
- Section 7 read with Section 13(2) (charge; sentence term not stated in appellate judgment) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988
- Finding of the Court (extract)
- “The co-convict, [name withheld], who was a police officer, demanded bribe from the complainant.”
- Verdict, sentence and quantum
- Conviction recorded by the trial court. Sentence: convicted by Special Judge, Vigilance, Ranchi; sentence term not stated in the 2022 appellate judgment (charge framed u/s 7 r/w 13(2) PC Act)
- Present status of the proceedings
- An appeal is pending; the pendency of an appeal is not a finding.
Compiled from the judgment and the cited sources. Findings are those of the court; this card adds none of its own.
Special Judge, Vigilance, Ranchi convicted the accused police personnel on 20 September 2003. An appeal is pending; initiation or pendency of an appeal is not a finding.
Sentence & charges
Sentence: convicted by Special Judge, Vigilance, Ranchi; sentence term not stated in the 2022 appellate judgment (charge framed u/s 7 r/w 13(2) PC Act)
Sections: PC Act 1988 s.7 r/w s.13(2) (charge; sentence term not stated in appellate judgment)
Appeal status
Appeal pending.