A Delhi court has held that the prosecution proved the demand and acceptance of a Rs 20 lakh bribe by Dr Surender Kumar Bhandoria, then Additional Director (Education), in connection with departmental and anti-corruption proceedings against a suspended municipal school inspector.
The case arose from a complaint by Pramod Kumar, who was posted as a School Inspector in Green Park under the erstwhile South Delhi Municipal Corporation (SDMC) until February 11, 2020. He was suspended the following day pending a departmental inquiry into alleged financial irregularities.
According to the complaint placed before the court, Kumar alleged that Bhandoria was demanding Rs 20 lakh from him in connection with both the departmental inquiry and an Anti-Corruption Bureau case registered against him and two others.
Kumar’s complaint to the CBI’s Anti-Corruption Branch stated that Bhandoria, then Additional Director/DDE, Central District, Lajpat Nagar, communicated with him through WhatsApp calls and chats. He sought legal action against the officer, alleging that the demand was linked to the cases pending against him.
The court, while examining the evidence, rejected Bhandoria’s contention that he had no official role or authority concerning Kumar. It noted that official records showed Bhandoria had been given charge as Deputy Director of Education by the SDMC and had also initiated proceedings for Kumar’s eviction from official accommodation.
The court further relied on conversations recorded during the verification and trap proceedings, observing that Bhandoria had taken upon himself the task of helping Kumar with his departmental inquiry, vigilance proceedings and anti-corruption case, including finding suitable lawyers for him. The complainant also testified that during verification, Bhandoria had shown him two draft notings and told him that the noting against him could be dropped.
The court found Kumar’s testimony credible and held that the prosecution had established both the demand and acceptance of illegal gratification. It consequently invoked the statutory presumption under Section 20 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, observing that the presumption that the money was accepted as a motive or reward for official action had not been rebutted.
The court thereafter held Bhandoria guilty under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
