Section 65B Certificate Produced Six Years Late Cannot Rescue Trap Recordings; Bribery Conviction Set Aside: Rajasthan High Court

The complainant told the Anti-Corruption Bureau on 16.04.2012 that the appellant had demanded ₹10,000 for issuing a jamabandi and passbook needed for a loan on the land (para 2). The ACB verified the demand and laid a trap on 17.04.2012 at Sub-Tehsil Bajju; the prosecution case was that the appellant accepted ₹3,500, tried to throw the money away and was caught on the spot (para 2.1). On 21.05.2022 the Special Judge, Prevention of Corruption Act Cases, Bikaner, convicted him under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read with 13(2) of the PC Act and imposed two years' simple imprisonment and a ₹2,000 fine on each count (paras 1, 1.1).

The complainant (PW-5) turned hostile, denying the demand, the payment and the trap; following Banarasi Das and N. Sunkanna, the Court held that demand and acceptance then had to be proved by independent evidence, which was absent (para 7). No work was pending with the appellant: he was a Patwari in the Colonisation Department, jamabandis fall within the Revenue Department, copies had already been issued and the mutation was already effected (para 8). PW-4, who accompanied the complainant for verification, heard no demand, and the amount shifted from ₹10,000 to ₹5,000, ₹4,000 and finally ₹3,500 (para 9). The money was recovered from the ground, not from the appellant's conscious possession, and none of PW-8 to PW-10 conclusively saw the exchange (para 9.1). The CDs were prepared on 17.04.2012, but the Section 65B certificate was absent from the charge-sheet and surfaced only on 30.05.2018, when PW-12 deposed; the recorder was never produced and the CDs were inaudible in court (paras 10.2, 10.4-10.6). Relying on Anvar P.V. and Arjun Panditrao Khotkar, the Court held the certificate a mandatory condition precedent and the electronic evidence inadmissible (paras 10.3, 10.12).