No Proof of Bribe Demand: Telangana HC Acquits Professors in MBBS Practical Exam Case
Telangana- The Telangana High Court acquitted two external evaluators, holding that the prosecution failed to prove the essential element of “demand” under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Both evaluators were accused of demanding a bribe from a final-year MBBS student at Osmania Medical College.
The charges arise out of action taken by the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) based on a complaint filed by a student who alleged that the professors had demanded Rs 5,000 and Rs 6,000, respectively, in exchange for giving passing marks in practical examinations.
The high court found serious flaws in the prosecution's case. It was an admitted fact that the practical exams were completed on May 11, 2002, and the marks were finalised on the same day.
Meanwhile, the court said that once the evaluation is completed and the marks are handed over to the chief examiner, the accused has no right to alter or influence the results, thereby eliminating the possibility of “official favour” pending at the time of the alleged demand, DeccanChronicle report.
At the same time, the court also said that the chief examiner, who is a crucial witness and who could have confirmed or denied the allegation of manipulation of marks, was not examined by the prosecution. The mark sheet of the complainant was not produced.
Further, the Court observed that the evidence of the sole prosecution witness lacked corroboration and none of the other students who had taken the exam were examined, and there was no explanation as to why only the complainant would be targeted for such a bribe demand.
Hence, Justice Surender relied on various judgments of the Supreme Court and reiterated that mere recovery of cash without independent proof of demand and acceptance was not enough to sustain a conviction under the Prevention of Corruption Act. Accordingly, the judge allowed the appeal, set aside the trial court's judgment, acquitted the two professors and ordered their release.
The judge was dealing with criminal appeals filed by Dr Gurushantappa S Bandi and Dr K Anand Rao challenging their conviction and sentence by the trial court. The trial court had earlier convicted the appellants under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read with 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one and a half years each.
