Illegal demand not proved, Thane court acquits I-T officer in 2006 bribery case

A special CBI court in Maharashtras Thane district has acquitted an Income Tax officer accused of demanding a bribe from a businessman nearly two decades ago observing that the prosecution failed to establish the crucial element of illegal demand required to secure a conviction under corruption lawsSpecial Judge DS Deshmukh on Friday acquitted Income Tax officer Anil Ratnakar Mallel 44 who had been facing charges under the Prevention of Corruption Act 1988 in connection with a case registered in 2006The court held that the recovery of money alone was insufficient to prove the offence in the absence of convincing evidence that a bribe had actually been demandedCourt stresses importance of proving illegal demandIn its order the court observed that establishing an illegal demand for money is a fundamental requirement in corruption cases and cannot be substituted merely by the recovery of tainted cashThe evidence of recovery of tainted amount from Mallel when evidence of the previous demand is lacking or is not satisfactory would be totally insufficient to hold the accused guilty the court notedThe judge further stated that once the prosecution fails to prove the initial demand the evidence gathered during the trap operation becomes questionable and cannot by itself form the basis for a convictionCase stemmed from 2006 CBI trapAccording to the prosecution the Central Bureau of Investigations AntiCorruption Branch conducted a trap operation on December 13 2006 following a complaint filed by businessman Jaisukhlal Waghani proprietor of JP ElectronicsThe complainant alleged that officials had demanded Rs 275 lakh to clear a scrutiny file related to his businessBased on the complaint the CBI laid a trap and subsequently registered a case against Mallel and Additional Commissioner Pankaj GargHowever proceedings against Garg were later abated following his death in 2024Audio evidence raised doubts over prosecutions claimDuring the trial the court examined audio transcripts and witness testimonies presented by the prosecutionThe judgment noted that the recorded conversations did not clearly establish that Mallel had demanded a bribe Instead the transcripts suggested that the complainant had proactively offered moneyThe court also found inconsistencies and contradictions in the statements of prosecution witnesses weakening the case against the accusedThese discrepancies the judge observed created doubts about the prosecutions version of events and made it difficult to conclude beyond reasonable doubt that an illegal demand had been madeCourt notes possibility of money being plantedAnother factor that weighed in favour of the accused was the nature of the office environment where the alleged trap took placeThe court pointed out that Mallel was working in an open office hall and that the complainant was seated close to his desk drawerAccording to the judgment the possibility that the cash could have been placed in the drawer while the officers attention was elsewhere could not be completely ruled outThis further weakened the prosecutions argument that the recovery of the money directly linked the accused to the alleged offenceProcedural lapses also highlightedApart from doubts regarding the alleged demand the court identified several procedural shortcomings in the investigationThe judgment referred to concerns regarding the validity of the prosecution sanction a delay of 17 days in registering the first information report FIR and questions related to the handling and integrity of sample evidence collected during the investigationTaking these factors into account the court concluded that the prosecution had failed to establish its case beyond reasonable doubt and acquitted Mallel of all charges under the Prevention of Corruption ActWith inputs from PTI