27 Years Later, No Mercy: Delhi HC Upholds Constable’s Jail Term for ₹300 Bribe
New Delhi, April 16, 2026 — In a stern message against police corruption, the Delhi High Court has refused to show leniency in a bribery case dating back 27 years. On Wednesday, the court upheld the one-year rigorous imprisonment sentence of a head constable accused of accepting a paltry bribe of ₹300 to return the registration certificate (RC) of a stolen motorcycle.
Hearing the appeal filed by the accused, Head Constable Sumer Singh, Justice Chandrasekharan Sudha dismissed the plea of innocence, emphasizing that the demand for illegal gratification can be clearly inferred from the surrounding circumstances of the case.
The 1999 Bike Theft and the ₹300 Bribe
The origins of the case date back to April 1999, when the complainant lodged a First Information Report (FIR) at the Patel Nagar Police Station regarding his stolen motorcycle.
The bike was eventually recovered by the police from Mathura. Head Constable Sumer Singh, who was investigating the case, facilitated the return of the motorcycle to the complainant following a court order. However, Singh allegedly withheld the vehicle’s original RC, claiming it needed to be attached to the official case file.
According to the prosecution, when the complainant repeatedly requested his RC back, the constable initially demanded a bribe of ₹3,000. Following negotiations, the illicit demand was reduced to ₹300.
Unwilling to pay the bribe, the complainant approached the Anti-Corruption Branch (ACB) of the CBI. On April 3, 2000, a trap was successfully laid, and Singh was caught red-handed accepting the tainted currency notes at around 4:00 PM.
An “Unbroken Chain of Guilt”
In October 2006, a trial court found Singh guilty under the Prevention of Corruption Act and sentenced him to one year of rigorous imprisonment along with a fine. Aggrieved, Singh filed an appeal in the Delhi High Court, arguing through his counsel that he had been falsely implicated and that there was no direct evidence of a bribe demand.
Justice Sudha, however, completely rejected the defense’s arguments in the April 15 order. The court noted that the recovery of the tainted currency directly from the accused’s pocket, a positive phenolphthalein test (chemical used in trap cases), and his presence at the spot formed a “complete chain of circumstances.”
“These circumstances lead to a clear and reasonable inference that the accused had voluntarily accepted the money,” the court observed.
Addressing the defense’s argument regarding minor inconsistencies and a partially hostile witness, the High Court clarified that the core of the prosecution’s case remained entirely credible. The court firmly held that the sequence of events immediately before and after the transaction proved an unbroken chain of guilt, leaving no room to suspect that the money had been planted.
