₹2 Crore Bribery Case: Rajasthan Government Gives Clean Chit to RPS Divya Mittal, Major Setback for ACB

Jaipur: In a major development in the ₹2 crore bribery case, the Rajasthan government has granted significant relief to Rajasthan Police Service (RPS) officer Divya Mittal, refusing to accord prosecution sanction under Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act. The decision effectively brings the Anti-Corruption Bureau’s (ACB) case to a halt, amounting to a clean chit for the officer.

Divya Mittal, then posted as Additional SP at the SOG Ajmer unit, was arrested by the ACB three years ago on charges of demanding a bribe of ₹2 crore. However, the state government has now declined permission to prosecute her, citing procedural lapses.

Government Clearance Before Trial
Sources said that under the Prevention of Corruption Act, prior approval from the competent authority is mandatory before initiating action against a serving government officer. In this case, approval from the Personnel Department was allegedly not obtained before action was taken against the RPS officer.

As a result, the state government refused prosecution sanction, delivering a major blow to the ACB even before the matter could proceed to trial. Officials noted that the question of what could have been proven in court has now become irrelevant due to the lack of sanction.

Refusal to Give Voice Sample Weakened Case
At the time of arrest, the ACB claimed to possess audio recordings allegedly containing proof of the bribe demand. These audio clips were sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) for verification.

However, when served notices to provide voice samples for comparison, Divya Mittal reportedly refused to comply. In the absence of a voice sample, forensic confirmation of the audio evidence became impossible, significantly weakening the prosecution’s case.

Disproportionate Assets Case Also Filed
Apart from the bribery case, the ACB had also registered a disproportionate assets case against Divya Mittal. During the investigation, an allegedly unauthorized luxury resort constructed in Udaipur was demolished by authorities. The ACB had claimed that the property was built using illegally acquired funds.

With the government’s refusal to grant prosecution sanction in the bribery case, questions are now being raised about the future course of action in the broader investigation.

The development has reignited debate over procedural safeguards, accountability, and the challenges faced by investigative agencies in prosecuting corruption cases involving senior officials.