In Brief
A Central Excise Commissioner was accused of conspiring to conduct a fake raid and extort Rs 60 lakhs through a middleman using intercepted phone calls as evidence. The Supreme Court dismissed the CBI's appeal against the High Court's order quashing charges, holding that the two key intercepted calls (Nos. 48 and 51) did not establish the respondent's involvement. Call 48 showed he was not in the picture; Call 51 used cryptic language that remained ambiguous. Critically, the prosecution failed to prove demand for illegal gratification, which the Court held indispensable under the Prevention of Corruption Act. Without demand, mere proximity or recovered money cannot sustain a conviction.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.