Search Results for "Prevention of Corruption Act"

461 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 461 result(s)

© 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

High Court of Karnataka Quashes FIR Against Contract Driver in Corruption Case — No Demand of Bribe by Non-Public Servant. Petitioner, a contract driver of BESCOM, was not a public servant under Section 7(a) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, and no demand of bribe was made by him.

The petitioner, Mr. Murali Krishna R., was a contract driver employed at the BESCOM Corporate Office in Bengaluru. He was arraigned as accused No.2 in...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Acquits Head Constable in Corruption Case Due to Unreliable Trap Proceedings and Contradictory Witness Testimony. Demand and Acceptance of Bribe Not Proved Beyond Reasonable Doubt Under Sections 8 and 13(1)(d) r/w 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

The appellant, Sri. Manjanna M.K., a Head Constable at Bagalagunte Police Station, was convicted by the XXIII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka 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, Sri Manjunatha Kutta, was convicted by the Special Judge, Bengaluru Urban District, for offences under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read wit...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Quashes Lokayukta Investigation for Lack of Prior Sanction Under Section 17-A of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Investigation conducted without mandatory prior approval from competent authority held null and void.

The petitioners, three public servants employed with the Pattana Panchayat, Jagalur, Davangere District, filed a writ petition before the High Court o...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Grants Anticipatory Bail to Accused in Bank Fraud Case Due to Cooperation and No Custodial Interrogation Required. Petitioners Allegedly Induced Bank to Sanction Loans Based on Forged Documents, but Court Found No Need for Custody as Documents Already Seized and Petitioners Cooperated.

The petitioners, Rudhir Sareen, Saurav Vinay Jain, and Kamlesh Hari Kochra, filed separate writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of Ind...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Acquits Accused in Corruption Case Due to Lack of Demand and Acceptance of Bribe. Conviction under Section 7 and Section 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, Satish Ganpatrao Suryavanshi, was convicted by the Special Judge, Ichalkaranji, for offences under Section 7 and Section 13(1)(d) read ...