When the prosecution failed to prove the factum of demand and acceptance of bribe, two government employees accused of demanding and accepting bribe were acquitted and that is what happened in Madan Lal v State of Rajasthan [2025 INSC 340].
In this case, the prosecution claimed that the bribe money was recovered from the Appellants’ pockets and that their hands and clothes tested positive for phenolphthalein (a chemical used in trap cases). However, the independent witnesses stated that the money was scattered on the floor.
The trap team spoke of a recovery of the bribe amounts from the possession of the accused and the hands and trousers of the accused having positively reacted to the test solution.
But the deposition is contrary to the statements made by the independent witnesses. They said some notes were found thrown on the floor but none spoke of any of the accused having taken out the notes and thrown them on the floor.
The presumption under Section 20 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (PC Act) would not arise against the accused unless the factum of demand and acceptance of bribe is established by the prosecution.
Reference
- Madan Lal v State of Rajasthan [2025 INSC 340]
