Former BEST Conductor Cleared in Decade-Old Bribery Case Due to ACB Failures
In a significant legal development, a special court in Mumbai has acquitted a former BEST conductor who was accused of demanding and accepting a bribe nearly nine years ago. The court cited critical procedural lapses by the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) and the absence of key witnesses, including the deceased complainant, as primary reasons for the verdict.
Court Highlights Prosecution's Failure to Prove Charges
Special Judge S S Nagur delivered the acquittal, emphasizing that the prosecution failed to establish the authenticity of electronic evidence presented in the case. The judge noted, "The verification of demand and acceptance of the amount is not proved. The prosecution failed to prove the actual obtainment to make out the offence of criminal misconduct." This ruling underscores the importance of robust evidence in corruption cases.
The case dates back to 2017 when the complainant, Suryaprakash Gujarati, alleged that the accused, Santaji Kavhar (54), had demanded Rs 2,500 to provide a certified copy of a 1995 voter list. This document was required for a redevelopment project. According to the ACB, Kavhar was caught accepting Rs 2,200 during a trap operation while on deputation at the Charkop poll office.
Defense Points to Lack of Evidence and Witnesses
Vaibhav Bagade, the advocate representing Kavhar, argued that there were no independent eyewitnesses to corroborate the bribery allegations. He further criticized the forensic science laboratory (FSL) report, stating, "The FSL report cannot be considered as it does not disclose at what frequency the voice sample was recorded." This technical flaw weakened the prosecution's reliance on electronic evidence.
Compounding the prosecution's challenges, the complainant, Suryaprakash Gujarati, passed away in 2021 before he could be examined in court. His death eliminated a crucial source of testimony, leaving the case heavily dependent on circumstantial and documentary evidence, which the court found insufficient.
Implications for Anti-Corruption Efforts
This acquittal raises questions about the effectiveness of anti-corruption investigations and the need for meticulous procedural adherence. The ACB's failure to secure reliable evidence and independent witnesses highlights potential gaps in enforcement mechanisms. Legal experts suggest that such cases underscore the necessity for thorough documentation and witness management in corruption trials.
The verdict serves as a reminder of the judicial system's reliance on concrete proof beyond reasonable doubt. While anti-corruption agencies play a vital role in combating graft, their efforts must be backed by legally sound procedures to ensure convictions. This case may prompt reviews of ACB protocols to prevent similar outcomes in future investigations.
