The Supreme Court has acquitted Khanindra Kr. Dutta in a corruption case arising from alleged false bills for medicines in Assam, holding that a conviction under Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 cannot stand when there is no finding that the accused obtained any valuable thing or pecuniary advantage.
A Bench of Justice J. B. Pardiwala and Justice K. Vinod Chandran delivered the judgment on September 8, 2026, allowing Criminal Appeal No. 1882 of 2024.
Background of the Case
The case originated from a complaint by Assam's Veterinary Department concerning an alleged loss of Rs. 5,97,200. The allegation involved false receipt-cum-challan bills for medicines that were allegedly never supplied, while payments were made to a fictitious firm.
Seven persons were charge-sheeted. The trial court convicted four, while three were acquitted. During the appeal before the High Court, one accused was acquitted, but Dutta, who was the store-in-charge, and another accused, the storekeeper, remained convicted under Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act.
The prosecution case was that the storekeeper entered the medicines in the store register and Dutta certified their receipt, although the medicines were allegedly not received. The High Court, however, found no evidence showing that either accused had obtained any valuable thing or pecuniary advantage. It acquitted them of several IPC charges but maintained the corruption conviction.
Supreme Court's Observation
The Supreme Court focused on the requirement of obtaining a pecuniary advantage under Section 13(1)(d).
"Without a pecuniary advantage, there could be no conviction under Section 13(1)(d)," the Court observed, noting that the High Court itself had categorically found that such advantage had not been established.
The Court also noted that the CBI had not challenged the High Court's decision acquitting the accused under several IPC provisions. It further observed that the investigation did not appear to have traced the money trail after the departmental funds were disbursed.
Decision
The Court also expressed concern over the large volume of evidence produced in corruption prosecutions. In the present case, 62 witnesses were examined, although the High Court relied on evidence from only nine witnesses.
Finding no basis to sustain Dutta's conviction under the provision invoked by the High Court, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal and acquitted him.
It directed that he be released forthwith if in custody, unless required in another case, and cancelled his bail bonds if he was already on bail.
Case Details:
Case Title: Khanindra Kr. Dutta vs Central Bureau of Investigation
Case Number: Criminal Appeal No. 1882 of 2024
Judge: Justices J.B. Pardiwala and K. Vinod Chandran
Decision Date: September 8, 2026
-300x169.webp)
-300x169.webp)
