In Brief
A government engineer was prosecuted for alleged corruption and criminal conspiracy in connection with a power project contract dispute that was referred to arbitration. The Supreme Court discharged him, holding that at the charge stage, the court must ensure the accused was actually involved in the wrongdoing alleged. The engineer had no decision-making authority over the arbitration referral—that decision was made by senior board officials. He merely prepared routine file notes implementing board decisions and received no bribes or benefits. The Court found no prima facie case of conspiracy or misappropriation and discharged the appellant, criticizing the selective prosecution of junior officials while sparing senior decision-makers.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.