Twists of a Trap: Bombay High Court Acquits Both in 20-Year-Old Corruption Case.


06 August 2025 Criminal Appeals & Suspension of Sentence >> Criminal Law  

A small room transfer within the crowded administrative hallways of Navi Mumbai Municipal Corporation, the seed of a courtroom drama that would span almost two decades.

Diksha Bharat Dhande, a Senior Clerk cum Tax Inspector, and co-worker Chahu Balu Mhatre, a peon, were both at the center of corruption charges. The saga started when Manoj Chaurasiya, who had bought a small room in Turbhe, requested that the municipal files be changed into his name. In order to assist him, his friend Annappa Ragi intervened.


 

 

The prosecution says that Diksha had initially demanded Rs. 5,000 but settled at Rs. 3,000. Annappa did not wish to pay a bribe and went to the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB). Pre-marked notes smeared with anthracene powder by the ACB was used as bait. The money was allegedly handed over to Chahu on 8 September 2005, at Diksha's instance. Glowing powder on his pocket and hands appeared to authenticate the transaction.

The case in the Special Judge Thane concluded with a divided verdict: Diksha was convicted and awarded one year's imprisonment, but Chahu was acquitted due to insufficient evidence that he had knowledge of the demand. Two appeals were filed—Diksha disputed her conviction, while the State disputed the acquittal of Chahu.

In the High Court, Justice Sarang V. Kotwal went into the evidence meticulously. Complainant Annappa's evidence gave rise to red flags—he was being cross-examined in a way that seemed to violate fair trial principles. His responses were mostly affirmation responses to leading questions, without independent description. The dates also did not match: the application for transfer had only been made on 5 September 2005, and yet the alleged demands were reported to have taken place on 1 and 2 September.

Manoj, the buyer, further confused the scenario with conflicting remarks, and the panch witness Nitin's version had glaring inconsistencies regarding where the dirty notes were stored prior to the sting. All such inconsistencies, the Court observed, rendered the prosecution case very improbable.

Finally, the High Court declared that the trial was not equitable and the evidence unreliable. Diksha's conviction was set aside, and she was acquitted of all the charges. The State's appeal against Chahu's acquittal was rejected, upholding that he also had no criminal liability.

After almost two decades, the long shadow of the case of the corruption trap finally dissipated, resulting in liberty for both accused.


Section 141, Indian Evidence Act - 1872  

Section 142, Indian Evidence Act - 1872  

Section 143, Indian Evidence Act - 1872  

Section 145, Indian Evidence Act - 1872  

Indian Evidence Act, 1872