Supreme Court Restores Kerala Officer's Bribery Conviction Despite Hostile Witness
The Supreme Court of India has restored the conviction and two-year sentence of a Kerala taluk supply officer accused of accepting a Rs 500 bribe in 2009. The bench, comprising Justices Sanjay Kumar and K Vinod Chandran, set aside the Kerala High Court’s earlier acquittal, which had cited inconsistencies in the complainant’s testimony and the witness turning hostile. The Supreme Court ruled that a hostile witness’s testimony cannot be discarded entirely; instead, courts must evaluate credible portions corroborated by other evidence. The case involved allegations that the officer demanded money to countersign official ration records. A vigilance trap led to the recovery of marked currency from the accused, supported by chemical tests. Although the complainant showed inconsistencies during cross-examination, the court found his initial account corroborated by an independent witness present during pre-trap proceedings and the trap officer’s records. This judgment reinforces the legal principle that partial credibility of hostile witnesses is admissible when backed by material evidence, ensuring that technicalities do not undermine proven corruption cases involving public servants.
Wire timeline
Supreme Court Restores Kerala Officer's Bribery Conviction Despite Hostile Witness
The Supreme Court of India has restored the conviction and two-year sentence of a Kerala taluk supply officer accused of accepting a Rs 500 bribe in 2009. The bench, comprising Justices Sanjay Kumar and K Vinod Chandran, set aside the Kerala High Court’s earlier acquittal, which had cited inconsistencies in the complainant’s testimony and the witness turning hostile. The Supreme Court ruled that a hostile witness’s testimony cannot be discarded entirely; instead, courts must evaluate credible portions corroborated by other evidence. The case involved allegations that the officer demanded money to countersign official ration records. A vigilance trap led to the recovery of marked currency from the accused, supported by chemical tests. Although the complainant showed inconsistencies during cross-examination, the court found his initial account corroborated by an independent witness present during pre-trap proceedings and the trap officer’s records. This judgment reinforces the legal principle that partial credibility of hostile witnesses is admissible when backed by material evidence, ensuring that technicalities do not undermine proven corruption cases involving public servants.
The Indian Express