Cuttack, July 9: Orissa High Court has ruled that prosecution evidence in an illegal gratification case is not acceptable in the absence of clinching materials relating to demand and acceptance, non-conducting of necessary formalities before search and seizure and when there are discrepancies in the statements of the witnesses vis-a-vis an FIR.

The court gave the ruling while quashing a trial court order on a 14-year-old illegal gratification case involving two traffic inspectors.

The state vigilance had registered cases against Bimbadhar Satpathy and Sudhir Kumar Xalxo -both traffic inspectors in Odisha Motor Vehicles department at Koraput - for allegedly collecting illegal gratification from bus/ truck drivers without issuing money receipts while checking vehicles on the NH-43 on February 5, 2003. Two constables were present with them.

The Court of Special Judge (Vigilance), Jeypore, convicted both the traffic inspectors and sentenced them to two years imprisonment, but acquitted the two constables who were also accused in the case, on August 20, 2009.

Both Satpathy and Xalxo had challenged the trial court order in the high court in the same year.

The single-judge bench of Justice S.K. Sahoo held that the trial court order "suffers from grave infirmity and illegality" as its findings are "based on mere surmises and conjectures".

"The conclusions drawn by the trial court are perverse and against the weight of evidence. The view taken by the trial court is unreasonable and not plausible and therefore, the impugned judgment and order of conviction is liable to be set aside," Justice Sahoo ruled in his June 29 order.

"Accordingly, both the appeals are allowed and the impugned judgment and the order of conviction of the appellants are set aside. The appellants who are on bail are discharged from the liability of their bail bonds. Their personal bonds as well as surety bonds stand cancelled," the order said.