Supreme Court: tainted money recovery alone cannot convict under PC Act

The core issue is whether the recovery of tainted money without sufficient proof of a specific demand for illegal gratification is sufficient to sustain a conviction under Sections 7 and 13(2) of the Act.

Who it concerns: Appellant: Jaswinder Singh (deceased, represented by legal representatives); Respondent: State of Punjab; Bench: Justice Ujjal Bhuyan.

What the court decided

• The Court references the precedent in P. Satyanarayana Murthy Vs. State of A.P., holding that proof of demand for illegal gratification is the gravamen of the offence under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d)(i) and (ii) of the PC Act.
• The Court states that mere acceptance or recovery of an amount, without proof of demand, is not sufficient to bring home the charge under the PC Act.
• The Court notes that the failure of the prosecution to prove the demand for illegal gratification is fatal to the conviction.

Also in the document

• The appellant, Jaswinder Singh, died during the pendency of the appeal, and his legal representatives were substituted to contest the case.
• The appellant had been granted bail by the Supreme Court in 2014 after being in jail for approximately seven months.
• The conviction was originally passed by the Special Judge, Hoshiarpur, and affirmed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana.