Search Results for "Prevention of Corruption Act"

458 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 458 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

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

The appellant, Mahesh Ramesh Jadhav, was convicted by the Special Judge, Amalner, for offences under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corr...

© 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(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 set aside as prosecution failed to prove demand and acceptance beyond reasonable doubt.

The appellant, Aarif Ali Yusuf Ali Sayyad, was convicted by the Special Judge, Dhule, for offences under Sections 7 and 13(2) of the Prevention of Cor...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Acquits Appellant in Prevention of Corruption Act Case — Abetment of Bribe Not Proven. Pan Shop Owner's Conviction Under Section 12 Set Aside as Evidence Lacked Specific Demand and Proof of Mens Rea.

The appellant, Abdul Mannan Mohd. Yusuf, was convicted under Section 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 by the Special Court, Nagpur, in Spe...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Acquits Accused in Corruption Case Due to Lack of Evidence 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, Sitaram S/o. Baliram Fating, a retired Maintenance City Survey Officer, was convicted by the Special Court (A.C.B.), Nagpur, in Special...

© 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

Bombay High Court Upholds Removal of Sarpanch in Corruption Case. Registration of FIR and arrest under Prevention of Corruption Act constitutes disgraceful conduct under Section 39(1) of Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act, 1959, justifying removal without awaiting conviction.

The petitioner, Dr. Narendra Purushottam Ingole, was elected as a Member of Gram Panchayat Wadki in June 2015 and subsequently elected as Sarpanch. A ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Upholds Conviction for Perjury Against Trap Panch Witness for Giving Contradictory Testimony in Corruption Case. Witness's Inconsistent Statements in Chief and Cross-Examination Amounted to Perjury Under Section 193 IPC.

The appellant, Manikrao Shivram Wagh, was a trap panch witness in a corruption case (Special Case No.4/1999) against Samadhan Bhusari, who was tried f...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Acquits Accused in Corruption Case Due to Unreliable Evidence of Demand and Acceptance. Conviction under Sections 7, 12, 13(1)(d) r/w 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 set aside as prosecution failed to prove demand and acceptance beyond reasonable doubt.

The appellant, Ramdas Waman Tadge, was convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Malegaon, in Special (A.C.B.) Case No. 01 of 2008 for offences unde...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Appeal as Abated Due to Death of Appellant in Corruption Case. Appeal Against Conviction Under Prevention of Corruption Act Abates as Sentence of Imprisonment Cannot Be Executed After Death Under Section 394 CrPC.

The appellant, Vijay Parvatrao Salunkhe, a police constable, was convicted by the trial court for offences under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read with Sec...