DALPAT SINGH & ANR. versus STATE OF RAJASTHAN

DALPAT SINGH & ANR. versus STATE OF RAJASTHAN

Conviction under s. 120B and 161 IPC as well as s. 5(2) read with s. 5(1)(a) of Prevention of Corruption Act cannot be sustained as the acts amounted to extortion, not illegal gratification for official favour. However, convictions can be sustained under s. 5(2) read with s. 5(1)(d) (and, for the first appellant, with s. 114 IPC) as the appellants, through abuse of official position, obtained money/valuables by illegal means.

Parties
Appellant: Dalpat Singh; Appellant: (Second Appellant's Name Not Stated); Respondent: State of Rajasthan
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
13 February 1968
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal by Special Leave From Judgment and Order Dated December 14, 1964 of the Rajasthan High Court in S.b. Criminal Appeal No. 656 of 1963
Outcome
Appeal partly allowed.
Legal Topics
Public Servant Misconduct, Extortion, Criminal Conspiracy, Illegal Gratification
Criminal Law Anti Corruption Law Public Servant Misconduct Extortion Criminal Conspiracy Illegal Gratification

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dalpat Singh

Appellant

(Second Appellant's Name Not Stated)

Appellant

State of Rajasthan

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal by Special Leave From Judgment and Order Dated December 14, 1964 of the Rajasthan High Court in S.b. Criminal Appeal No. 656 of 1963

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the acts alleged constitute offences under s. 161 IPC or s. 5(1)(a) and s. 5(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act
  2. 2 Whether conviction under s. 120B IPC was proper for the facts and evidence

Ratio Decidendi

Conviction under s. 120B and 161 IPC as well as s. 5(2) read with s. 5(1)(a) of Prevention of Corruption Act cannot be sustained as the acts amounted to extortion, not illegal gratification for official favour. However, convictions can be sustained under s. 5(2) read with s. 5(1)(d) (and, for the first appellant, with s. 114 IPC) as the appellants, through abuse of official position, obtained money/valuables by illegal means.

Court Disposition

Appeal partly allowed.

Orders

  • Appellants acquitted under ss. 120B and 161 IPC and under s. 5(2) read with s. 5(1)(a) of Prevention of Corruption Act.
  • Second appellant's conviction under s. 5(2) read with s. 5(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act sustained; sentence of 18 months rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 200 (with two months further imprisonment in default) affirmed.