Supreme Court: While granting bail to an officer accused of bribery and suspending the High Court’s conviction order, the Division Bench of J.B. Pardiwala and K.V. Viswanathan, JJ., observed that the prosecution failed to produce the currency notes that were seized from the possession of the accused-petitioner on the ground that the envelope containing the seized money was destroyed by rats and rodents.
The petitioner was serving as a Child Development Programme Officer when she was on trial for the offence punishable under Sections 7 and 13(2), Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. She was acquitted by the trial court; however, when the department appealed before the High Court, the acquittal was reversed, and the petitioner was held guilty of the alleged offence. The High Court sentenced her to undergo rigorous imprisonment of 3 and 4 years for the offence punishable under Sections 7 and 13(2), respectively.
The Court granted bail to the petitioner, subject to terms and conditions that the trial court may deem fit to impose, while suspending the substantive order of the High Court.
The Court further noted the observation recorded by the High Court in the impugned order, and was astonished by the fact recorded therein. The High Court had observed that the prosecution failed to produce the currency notes that were seized from the possession of the accused-petitioner on the ground that the envelope containing the seized money was destroyed by rats and rodents. The Court commented that:
“We wonder how many such currency notes recovered in this type of offences get destroyed as they are not kept at a safe place. It’s a huge revenue loss for the State.”
The Court concluded with the remark that the “explanation offered for the destruction of the currency notes also does not inspire any confidence”, and they shall scrutinise it while hearing the main matter.
[Aruna Kumari v. Economic Offences Unit, SLP(Crl.) No. 7601 of 2025, ordered on 24-4-2026]
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the petitioner: Senior Advocate S. Nagamuthu and AOR Hitendra Nath Rath, with Vikash Kumar Sinha and Laxmi, Advocates
For the respondent: NA
Buy Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 HERE
