Search Results for "ultra violet lamp"

24 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 24 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Acquits Accused in Corruption Case Due to Lack of Corroboration and Unreliable Witnesses. Demand and Acceptance of Bribe Not Proved Beyond Reasonable Doubt Under Sections 7, 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

The appellant, Bhimrao s/o Kondiram Wahule, was convicted by the Special Judge, Jalna, in Special Case No. 15 of 1996 for offences under Sections 7, 1...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Bombay at Aurangabad Hears Criminal Appeal Against Conviction Under Sections 7 and 13 of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The Accused, a Police Officer, Was Convicted for Demanding and Accepting Rs.400 as Illegal Gratification for Granting Bail.

The High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Aurangabad Bench, heard Criminal Appeal No. 104 of 1999 challenging the judgment and order of conviction dated...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Acquits Accused in Corruption Case Due to Invalid Sanction and Unreliable Trap Evidence. Demand and Acceptance of Bribe Not Proved Under Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

The appellant, Asaram Dhansing Umre, was convicted by the Special Judge, Aurangabad, in Special Case No.5 of 1998 under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read w...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Acquits Accused in Corruption Case Due to Unreliable Trap Witness and Lack of Corroboration. Demand and Acceptance of Bribe Not Proved Beyond Reasonable Doubt Under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

The appellant, Shabbir Mohamed Ishaque Bagwan, was convicted by the Special Judge, Pune, for offences under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read with 13(2) of...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Acquits Public Servants in Corruption Case Due to Unreliable Trap Witness and Lack of Corroboration. Conviction under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 set aside as demand and acceptance of bribe not proved beyond reasonable doubt.

The case involves two appeals against a conviction under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The appellants, Kashinath Vikramji Thorat (accused No...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Acquits Accused in Corruption Case Due to Unreliable Complainant and Lack of Corroboration. Demand and Acceptance of Bribe Not Proved Beyond Reasonable Doubt Under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

The appellant, Rajendra Suryakant Kapile, was a Senior Clerk in the Sub-Regional Provident Fund Office, CIDCO, Aurangabad. The complainant, Dharamchan...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court Acquits Accused in Corruption Case Due to Lack of Sanction and Doubtful Trap — Demand and Acceptance of Bribe Not Proved Beyond Reasonable Doubt. Sanction under Section 19 of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 not proved; complainant turned hostile; trap witness not independent.

The appellant, Manohar Bodade, was convicted by the Special Judge, Aurangabad in Special Case No. 01/1993 for offences under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) r...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Acquits Accused in Corruption Case Due to Unreliable Trap Witness and Lack of Corroboration. Demand and Acceptance of Bribe Not Proved Beyond Reasonable Doubt Under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

The appellant, Shailendra Manikrao Bakare, was convicted by the Special Judge, Pune, for offences under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2...