Prevention of Corruption Act Cases: Trap Cases, Sanction and Proof of Demand

The main offences

• Section 7: a public servant obtaining, accepting or attempting to obtain an undue advantage to perform a public duty improperly
• Section 8: giving or promising an undue advantage to a public servant, with protection for a person who was compelled to give it and reports the matter within seven days
• Section 13(1)(a): fraudulent misappropriation of property entrusted to the public servant
• Section 13(1)(b): intentional illicit enrichment, where a public servant cannot satisfactorily account for assets disproportionate to known sources of income

Who investigates in Bihar

Corruption cases against state government servants in Bihar are commonly investigated by the Vigilance Investigation Bureau, and some by the Special Vigilance Unit and the Economic Offences Unit. Cases against central government employees are investigated by the CBI. Trials are held before Special Judges.

Prior approval and sanction

Section 17A, added in 2018, requires prior approval of the competent authority before any inquiry or investigation into a recommendation made or decision taken by a public servant in discharging official functions, except where the person is arrested on the spot for accepting or attempting to accept an undue advantage. Separately, Section 19 requires sanction from the authority competent to remove the public servant before a court takes cognizance. The validity of sanction is a frequent issue at trial.

Trap cases and proof of demand

In a trap case, the prosecution usually relies on the complainant, a shadow witness, the recovery of treated currency notes and the phenolphthalein test. Proof of demand is essential; recovery of money alone is not enough. In Neeraj Dutta v. State (NCT of Delhi) (2022), a Constitution Bench held that demand and acceptance may be proved by circumstantial evidence where the complainant turns hostile or is unavailable, but must still be proved beyond reasonable doubt.

Disproportionate assets

In disproportionate-assets cases, the prosecution computes the assets at the start and end of a check period, the income from known sources and the expenditure. The defence rests on documents such as salary records, agricultural income, gifts, loans and the separate assets of family members, showing where the computation is wrong. Known sources of income means income from lawful sources.

Bail, quashing and appeal

Offences under the Act are tried by Special Judges. Bail and quashing petitions in cases from Bihar are heard by the Patna High Court, which also hears appeals against conviction.