Search Results for "Illegal gratification"

458 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 458 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Quashes Interception Orders in CBI Corruption Case for Lack of Reasons and Public Emergency. Orders under Section 5(2) of Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 set aside as they merely recited statutory language without recording cogent reasons demonstrating public safety or public emergency.

The petitioner, Shyamalendu Kumar Das, a Deputy Chief Labour Commissioner (Central), challenged two orders dated 9 March 2018 and 17 March 2018 passed...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Acquits Accused in Corruption Case Due to Misapplication of Section 8 of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 — Charge Framed Under Wrong Provision Invalidates Conviction

The appellant, a Junior Clerk in a Sessions Court, was convicted under Section 8 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 for allegedly demanding and...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Acquits Accused in Corruption Case Due to Lack of Demand and Acceptance of Bribe. Conviction under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read with 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 set aside as prosecution failed to prove demand and acceptance beyond reasonable doubt.

The appellant, Ambadas s/o Ramaji Sahare, was convicted by the Special Judge, Wardha in Special Case No.3/1996 for offences under Sections 7 and 13(1)...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses State Appeal Against Acquittal in Corruption Case — Demand of Bribe Not Proved Beyond Reasonable Doubt. Prosecution Failed to Establish Demand and Acceptance of Illegal Gratification Under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

The State of Maharashtra appealed against the judgment of the Special Judge, Sindhudurg at Oros, acquitting the respondent, Shridhar Madhavrao Murti, ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Acquits Accused in Corruption Case Due to Inconsistent Evidence and Lack of Sanction. Conviction under Sections 7, 13(1)(d) read with 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 set aside as prosecution failed to prove demand and acceptance of bribe beyond reasonable doubt.

The present appeal was filed by Vinayak Raghunath Wakle, who was convicted by the learned Special Judge, Aurangabad, in Special Case No. 8 of 1998 for...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Acquits Accused in Corruption Case Due to Lack of Proof of Demand. Conviction under Prevention of Corruption Act cannot be sustained when primary evidence of demand is absent due to complainant's death and no other reliable evidence establishes demand.

The Supreme Court allowed the appeal of Mrs. Neeraj Dutta, an LDC in Delhi Vidyut Board, who was convicted under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read with Sec...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

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(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

The appellant, Waman s/o Malhari Jambhulkar, was convicted by the Special Judge (Under Prevention of Corruption Act) and 4th Additional Sessions Judge...