Judgment Summary - Lavan Singh Churendra vs State of Chhattisgarh

It is most extremely significant to note that while ruling on a very crucial issue pertaining to recovery of currency notes, the Chhattisgarh High Court at Bilaspur in a most learned, laudable, landmark, logical and latest judgment titled Lavan Singh Churendra vs State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station A.C.B. Raipur in CRA No. 52 of 2018 and cited in Neutral Citation No.: 2025:CGHC:29642, pronounced on July 1, 2025, minced absolutely no words to state in no uncertain terms that:

Demand of illegal gratification is sine qua non to constitute the offence under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Mere recovery of currency notes itself does not constitute the offence under the Act, unless it is proved beyond all reasonable doubt that the accused voluntarily accepted the money knowing it to be bribe.

The Chhattisgarh High Court made it absolutely clear that in the absence of conclusive proof of demand and voluntary acceptance of illegal gratification, mere recovery of tainted money is insufficient to sustain a conviction.

Accordingly, the Court acquitted public servant Lavan Singh Churendra, who was earlier convicted by the Special Judge (Anti-Corruption), Raipur for offences under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read with 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The High Court set aside the conviction and sentence awarded by the Trial Court on December 20, 2017.

This judgment reaffirmed the legal principles established by the Supreme Court in:

• B. Jayaraj v. State of A.P., 2014 AIR SCW 2080 (para 8)
• Neeraj Dutta v. State (Govt. of N.C.T. of Delhi), AIR 2023 SC 330 (para 68)
• State of Lokayuktha Police, Davanagere v. C.B. Nagaraj, Criminal Appeal No.1157 of 2025 (para 25)

Trial Court Conviction

Hon’ble Chief Justice Shri Ramesh Sinha of Chhattisgarh High Court authored the judgment, beginning with para 1:

This criminal appeal arises out of the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 20.12.2017 passed by the Special Judge (Anti-Corruption) Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) in Special Case No.43/2015...

Conviction & Sentence:

• Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988: RI for 2 years and fine of ₹20,000/-, in default RI for 3 months
• Section 13(1)(d) r/w 13(2): RI for 2 years and fine of ₹20,000/-, in default RI for 3 months

Sentences to run concurrently.

Prosecution Case

The Bench elaborated that the complainant, Baijnath Netam, a Shiksha Karmi Grade-II, alleged that:

• He was in-charge of a tribal hostel with 44 students.
• Accused demanded ₹10,000 for stipend approval for January 2013, accepting ₹2,000 initially.
• Complainant lodged complaint with ACB Raipur and participated in a sting operation on 01.02.2013.
• Phenolphthalein powder was applied to the bribe money; procedure and instructions were documented in a panchnama.
• A trap team recorded and executed the sting operation with micro tape recorder and chemical tests.

Court Observations

Para 27: Trial Court failed to consider deficiencies and inadequacies in prosecution evidence.

Para 28: Proof of demand and acceptance of illegal gratification is mandatory to sustain conviction under bribery charges.

Para 29: Key distinctions explained:

• (i) Offer by bribe giver and mere acceptance by public servant – offence under Section 7.
• (ii) Demand and acceptance – offence under Section 13(1)(d)(i) and (ii).
• (iii) Both demand and acceptance must be proved; mere recovery is not enough.

Para 30: Complainant was terminated before the complaint was filed. Accused was not the sanctioning authority.

Para 31: Complainant had a grudge against the accused due to a prior departmental inquiry finding him guilty. Complaint appears motivated and suspicious.

Final Orders

Para 32: The appeal is allowed.

Para 33: Conviction and sentence under Section 7 and Section 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) are set aside. Accused acquitted of all charges.

Para 34: Bail bonds to remain operative for six months as per Section 437-A CrPC / Section 481 BNSS.

Para 35: Registrar (Judicial) directed to transmit original records to the Trial Court within a week.

Sanjeev Sirohi, Advocate,
s/o Col (Retd) BPS Sirohi, A 82, Defence Enclave,
Sardhana Road, Kankerkhera, Meerut - 250001, Uttar Pradesh