Madhya Pradesh High Court upholds acquittal in failed Lokayukta bribery trap case
The Madhya Pradesh High Court refused the Lokayukta leave to appeal against an acquittal in a 2019 bribery trap case, holding the trial court's view was sustainable.
Key points
- The Madhya Pradesh High Court on 23 October 2026 refused the Lokayukta leave to appeal against an acquittal in a bribery trap case.
- The court held the trap failed, the complainant did not support the prosecution and the alleged Rs 30,000 demand was not proved.
- The acquittal of 10 May 2024 stands, and the court said it reinforces the accused's presumption of innocence.
The Madhya Pradesh High Court on 23 October 2026 refused the Lokayukta police leave to appeal against an acquittal in a 2019 bribery trap case from Narmadapuram district. The trial court had acquitted the accused on 10 May 2024 of the charge under Section 7-A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, and the High Court held that the acquittal was a sustainable view of the evidence.
What Happened
According to the judgment, a man complained to the Special Police Establishment of the Lokayukta in Bhopal that the station house officer of Rampur Gurra police station was demanding Rs 30,000 to release his seized tractor-trolley, which a court had ordered released on 7 November 2019, and that the accused was conveying the demand. A trap was laid with Rs 14,000 provided by the complainant. On 20 November 2019 the accused refused to take the chemically treated notes, saying he had no instructions from the officer, and the trap was suspended. The final report was filed against the accused alone; the prosecution exonerated the station house officer.
The High Court found that the trap failed, so neither acceptance nor obtaining of a bribe was proved. The complainant and two relatives did not support the prosecution, and the complainant declined to identify the accused's voice in the recordings. Neither phone was seized, and the mobile connection allegedly used was issued in another person's name. A forensic report saying the voice was "probably" the accused's was only corroborative, the court held, not substantive evidence. It declined leave and dismissed the appeal.
What It Means
The acquittal stands. These were allegations, not findings of guilt; the accused is presumed innocent, and the High Court said the acquittal reinforces that presumption.
The judgment shows what courts look for in bribery cases: the demand for a bribe must be proved as a fact, and a recorded call must be tied to the accused by voice identification and the phone used, not by a forensic opinion alone.
Anyone asked for a bribe by an official can report it to the state anti-corruption bureau or Lokayukta; Oquilia's guide lists every state's helpline at https://www.oquilia.com/report-a-bribe.
Source: High Court judgment
Sources & Citations
- High Court judgment — Madhya Pradesh High Court