Circumstantial Evidence Can Help Convict Public Servants In Corruption Case: SC

Bhubaneswar: In a landmark verdict, the Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that public servants could be convicted in corruption cases if there is crucial case and also when there is no direct oral or documentary evidence against them.

A five-judge Constitution bench of the Supreme Court led by Justice S A Nazeer mentioned that unswerving efforts should be put in by both, the complainant as well as the prosecution to bring corrupt public servants in front and get them convicted. Both administration and governance become pure and uncorrupt in this way.

The bench, comprising Justices B R Gavai, A S Bopanna, V Ramasubramanian and B V Nagarathna, said, “In the absence of evidence of complainant (direct or primary), it is permissible to draw an inferential deduction of culpability.”

The Supreme Court also stated that even if direct evidence of the complainant is not available, due to death or other reason, still there could be a conviction of the public servant under the relevant provisions.

“In the event the complainant turns hostile or has died or is unable to let in his evidence during the trial, the demand of illegal gratification can be proved by letting in the evidence of any other witness either orally or documentary evidence or the prosecution can prove the case by circumstantial evidence,” the bench said.

It added, “The trial does not abate nor does it result in an order of acquittal of the public servant”.

The apex court said all this while analysing the issue whether in the absence of direct or primary evidence of demand of a bribe inferential deduction of guilt of a public servant can be drawn based on other evidence.