Search Results for "acceptance of bribe"

57 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 57 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Gujarat High Court Upholds Acquittal 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, 13(1)(d), 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

The State of Gujarat filed an appeal under Section 378(1)(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the judgment and order of acquittal dated...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Acquits Accused in Corruption Case Due to Unreliable Trap Witness and Inconsistent Evidence. Demand and Acceptance of Bribe Not Proved Beyond Reasonable Doubt Under Sections 7, 13(1)(d) read with 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

The appellant, Gajanan s/o Lobhaji Dahale, was convicted by the Special Judge, Pusad, for offences under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read with 13(2) of th...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Upholds Acquittal in Corruption Case Due to Unreliable Evidence and Plausible Defence of Handloan. Demand and acceptance of bribe not proved beyond reasonable doubt under Sections 7, 12, 13(1)(d) read with 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

The State of Maharashtra appealed against the judgment and order dated 26-04-2006 passed by the Special Judge and Additional Sessions Judge, Pusad, Di...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Acquits Appellants in Corruption Case Due to Lack of Proof of Demand and Acceptance. Conviction under Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 set aside as prosecution failed to establish essential ingredients.

The case involves two appeals against the judgment of the Special Court, Khamgaon, convicting the appellants under Sections 7, 13(1)(d) read with Sect...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

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

The appellant, Vijaykumar Marotrao Daiwalkar, was a Tax Superintendent in the Municipal Council, Chandrapur. He was convicted by the Special Judge, Ch...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

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

The appellant, Vijaykumar Marotrao Daiwalkar, was a Tax Superintendent in the Municipal Council, Chandrapur. He was convicted by the Special Judge, Ch...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Acquits Accused in Corruption Case Due to Lack of Corroboration and Inconsistent Evidence. 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, Manikrao Salunke, was a Naib Tahsildar in Omerga, Osmanabad district. He was convicted by the Special Judge, Osmanabad, for offences un...

© 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 Convict in Corruption Case Due to Unreliable Witnesses and Lack of Corroboration. Conviction under Sections 7, 13(1)(d) read with 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 set aside as trap witnesses were interested and evidence of demand and acceptance was not credible.

The appellant, Chandrakant Kisan Pujari, was a Noting Assistant at the District Industries Centre, Solapur. He was convicted by the Special Judge, San...