In Brief
A public servant was convicted under the Prevention of Corruption Act in 1999 for demanding a bribe of ₹500. On appeal 23 years later, the High Court upheld the conviction despite acknowledging that the trial court records had been lost and could not be properly reconstructed. The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, holding that Section 385 of the Criminal Procedure Code imposes a mandatory duty on appellate courts to obtain and examine trial records before deciding appeals. Upholding a conviction without access to complete evidence violates the fundamental right to fair procedure under Article 21. Given the substantial time lapse and unavailable evidence, setting aside the conviction was more just than ordering a retrial.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.