Kerala High Court Upholds Conviction Of Public Servant In Corruption Case, Cites Her 'Voluntary' Confession

The Kerala High Court refused to interfere with a trial court order, which found a public servant guilty of misappropriating over ₹2 Lakh, observing that the sanction order under the Prevention of Corruption Act was issued by the authority after due application of mind and that the accused had voluntarily given handwritten confessional statements. The court also said that the accused had not challenged the statements before superiors on the ground that it was given under threat. Thus, while upholding the conviction, the court modified her sentence. Justice A. Badharudeen delivered the judgment in a criminal appeal, where the petitioner, a former Sub-Postmaster at Pulpally, was convicted for misappropriating ₹2.73 lakh by abusing her official position.The court observed that the challenge raised by the counsel for the accused that the two confession statements were obtained by inducement, compulsion or threat could not be found."To the contrary, the same are found to be issued voluntarily by the accused," the court said. Justice A. Badharudeen noted that the defence failed to challenge the sanction during trial, the objection raised at appellate stage was held to be unsustainable. The Court further observed that the sanction order itself reflected due application of mind, having been issued after perusal of the prosecution records and satisfaction as to the necessity of prosecution."The sanction to prosecute the accused in this case got marked as Ext.P66 was proved through PW18, who had given the said sanction. During cross examination, nothing (was) asked to PW18 challenging the sanction...In fact, this challenge has no relevance in the instant case since the sanction was not at all challenged while cross examining PW18. Otherwise on perusal of Ext.P66, it was issued by applying mind by PW18 on perusal of the prosecution records and on satisfying the necessity of the prosecution of the accused,” the Court notedThe appellant also contested reliance on her written statements recorded on 26 and 27 March 2003, claiming they were the result of coercion. The Court rejected this contention, stressing that both confessions were penned by the accused in her own handwriting on the very day the shortage was detected, and the following day, without delay or compulsion.“It is relevant to note that if any inducement, compulsion, threat, behind Exts.P2 and P16, definitely the accused would have made complaint to the superior officials regarding obtainment of Exts.P2 and P16 in that way. No such course of action opted by the accused till the date of trial.” the court observed.The Court, thus held that the Special Court was not wrong in finding the accused committing the offence punishable under IPC and Prevention of Corruption Act. The Court allowed appeal in part by modifying the sentence to 18 months simple imprisonment along with fine of Rs 1,50,000/-. Case Title: Jayasree Rajkumar v Inspector of Police and AnotherCitation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 576Case No: Crl. App. 1562/ 2011Counsel for Appellant: Martin G ThottanCounsel for Respondent: Sasthamangalam S Ajithkumar (Spl. PP for CBI), Suvin R Menon, Sreelal N Warrier (SC- Sentral Board of Excise), Rekha S (Sr. PP), Rajesh A (Spl PP)Click Here To Read/ Download Judgment

Kerala High Court Upholds Conviction Of Public Servant In Corruption Case, Cites Her 'Voluntary' Confession

Anamika MJ

Tags