The Supreme Court of India on Tuesday expressed surprise but suspended the sentence of a convicted Bihar government officer after his lawyer argued that rats ate a portion of the bribe money, thereby reducing the evidence against him. The case dates back to 2012 when the officer was caught accepting a bribe of Rs 1.2 lakh. However, during the trial, it was claimed that rats had nibbled away Rs 50,000 of the marked currency notes, leaving only Rs 70,000 as evidence.
Court's Reaction and Decision
A bench comprising Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Sudhanshu Dhulia remarked that the argument was unusual but noted that the lower courts had already considered this aspect. The Supreme Court suspended the sentence of the officer, who was convicted under the Prevention of Corruption Act, pending the final disposal of his appeal. The court directed that the officer be released on bail.
Background of the Case
The officer, identified as Rajeshwar Prasad, was serving as a clerk in the Bihar Education Department. He was caught red-handed accepting a bribe from a complainant who had sought his help in getting a job. The Anti-Corruption Bureau had laid a trap and recovered the bribe money from his possession. During the trial, Prasad's defense claimed that the money was kept in a bag that was infested with rats, which ate a significant portion of the cash.
Legal Proceedings
The trial court convicted Prasad and sentenced him to three years of rigorous imprisonment. The Patna High Court later upheld the conviction but reduced the sentence to two years. Prasad then appealed to the Supreme Court. During the hearing, his counsel argued that the missing money due to rat consumption cast doubt on the prosecution's case. The Supreme Court, while expressing surprise at the peculiar defense, decided to suspend the sentence considering the overall circumstances.
Implications
This case has drawn widespread attention due to the unusual nature of the defense. Legal experts have noted that while the plea might seem far-fetched, the court's decision to suspend the sentence indicates a willingness to consider all evidence, even if it appears bizarre. The final outcome of the appeal will determine whether the rat-eaten money defense holds legal merit.
