'₹20 recovery can't...': After 30 years, Supreme Court acquits 2 Gujarat govt employees in ₹120 bribe case
In February 1996, the student approached the panchayat office for an income certificate required to avail educational concessions. According to the prosecution, the Talati-cum-Mantri demanded ₹120, allegedly ₹100 for himself and ₹20 for the peon
- Aug 21, 2026,
- Updated Aug 21, 2026 11:40 AM IST
The Supreme Court has acquitted two Gujarat government employees in a corruption case dating back to 1996 over an alleged ₹120 bribe, of which only ₹20 was recovered. A Bench of Justices Ujjal Bhuyan and Atul S Chandurkar set aside the convictions of a Talati-cum-Mantri and a peon, holding that the prosecution had failed to establish the crucial element of a bribe demand.
The case, Rafikmiya Ahmedmiya Malek v. State of Gujarat, involved an income certificate sought by a student from the Bechri Gram Panchayat, according to Bar and Bench.
Student approached panchayat for certificate
In February 1996, the student approached the panchayat office for an income certificate required to avail educational concessions. According to the prosecution, the Talati-cum-Mantri demanded ₹120, allegedly ₹100 for himself and ₹20 for the peon.
READ THIS: Student protest violence: SC forms 5-member panel with ex-CBI chief to investigate police action
The student then approached the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB), which organised a trap. He was instructed to carry ₹120 in marked currency notes treated with chemical powder.
After receiving the certificate at the panchayat office, the student handed ₹20 to the peon. The marked note was found in his possession after the raiding team entered the office following a pre-arranged signal. However, the remaining ₹100 was never recovered from the Talati-cum-Mantri.
Supreme Court finds inconsistencies
The trial court convicted both employees in 1999 under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. The Gujarat High Court upheld the convictions in 2015. Before the Supreme Court, the accused argued that the alleged demand had never been proved and that the peon had not demanded any money.
The top court found inconsistencies in the student's statements. It noted that in another case, he had claimed the Talati-cum-Mantri initially demanded ₹200 and later agreed to ₹120. This version was absent from his trial testimony.
DON'T MISS: Bribes.fyi shuts down: Who is 20-year-old Delhi techie Aryan Nishad behind viral anti-bribery platform?
The Court also questioned why the student gave only ₹20 to the peon despite being instructed to hand over the entire ₹120.
“This again raises a doubt as regards demand of ₹120/- by A1 (the Talati-cum-Mantri) in the backdrop of the complainant giving ₹20/- to A2 (the peon) despite being instructed to give the entire amount of ₹120/- whenever the demand was made,” the Court observed, according to Bar and Bench.
Recovery alone cannot prove corruption
The Bench noted that during cross-examination, the student admitted that the peon had never demanded money. The ₹20 was handed over only after the certificate had already been prepared and given to him. The Court also considered the peon's defence that the money was given because Eid was to be celebrated the following day and found the explanation probable.
On whether recovery of ₹20 could trigger the statutory presumption under Section 20 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, the Court said: “If the initial demand itself is not proved, mere recovery of the amount of ₹20/- from A2 would not resurrect the case of the prosecution to enable the Court to hold that the charge was proved,” according to Bar and Bench.
Prosecution sanction also invalid
Separately, the Court found that the sanction for prosecuting the Talati-cum-Mantri was invalid because it had been granted by an officer not competent to do so.
The Supreme Court therefore set aside the convictions and acquitted both employees, bringing an end to litigation that had continued for nearly three decades.
The Supreme Court has acquitted two Gujarat government employees in a corruption case dating back to 1996 over an alleged ₹120 bribe, of which only ₹20 was recovered. A Bench of Justices Ujjal Bhuyan and Atul S Chandurkar set aside the convictions of a Talati-cum-Mantri and a peon, holding that the prosecution had failed to establish the crucial element of a bribe demand.
The case, Rafikmiya Ahmedmiya Malek v. State of Gujarat, involved an income certificate sought by a student from the Bechri Gram Panchayat, according to Bar and Bench.
Student approached panchayat for certificate
In February 1996, the student approached the panchayat office for an income certificate required to avail educational concessions. According to the prosecution, the Talati-cum-Mantri demanded ₹120, allegedly ₹100 for himself and ₹20 for the peon.
READ THIS: Student protest violence: SC forms 5-member panel with ex-CBI chief to investigate police action
The student then approached the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB), which organised a trap. He was instructed to carry ₹120 in marked currency notes treated with chemical powder.
After receiving the certificate at the panchayat office, the student handed ₹20 to the peon. The marked note was found in his possession after the raiding team entered the office following a pre-arranged signal. However, the remaining ₹100 was never recovered from the Talati-cum-Mantri.
Supreme Court finds inconsistencies
The trial court convicted both employees in 1999 under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. The Gujarat High Court upheld the convictions in 2015. Before the Supreme Court, the accused argued that the alleged demand had never been proved and that the peon had not demanded any money.
The top court found inconsistencies in the student's statements. It noted that in another case, he had claimed the Talati-cum-Mantri initially demanded ₹200 and later agreed to ₹120. This version was absent from his trial testimony.
DON'T MISS: Bribes.fyi shuts down: Who is 20-year-old Delhi techie Aryan Nishad behind viral anti-bribery platform?
The Court also questioned why the student gave only ₹20 to the peon despite being instructed to hand over the entire ₹120.
“This again raises a doubt as regards demand of ₹120/- by A1 (the Talati-cum-Mantri) in the backdrop of the complainant giving ₹20/- to A2 (the peon) despite being instructed to give the entire amount of ₹120/- whenever the demand was made,” the Court observed, according to Bar and Bench.
Recovery alone cannot prove corruption
The Bench noted that during cross-examination, the student admitted that the peon had never demanded money. The ₹20 was handed over only after the certificate had already been prepared and given to him. The Court also considered the peon's defence that the money was given because Eid was to be celebrated the following day and found the explanation probable.
On whether recovery of ₹20 could trigger the statutory presumption under Section 20 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, the Court said: “If the initial demand itself is not proved, mere recovery of the amount of ₹20/- from A2 would not resurrect the case of the prosecution to enable the Court to hold that the charge was proved,” according to Bar and Bench.
Prosecution sanction also invalid
Separately, the Court found that the sanction for prosecuting the Talati-cum-Mantri was invalid because it had been granted by an officer not competent to do so.
The Supreme Court therefore set aside the convictions and acquitted both employees, bringing an end to litigation that had continued for nearly three decades.