Search Results for "trap"

403 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 403 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Acquits Deputy Commissioner of Excise in Corruption Case — Demand and Acceptance of Bribe Not Proved Beyond Reasonable Doubt. Conviction under Sections 7, 13(1)(d) r/w 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 set aside due to unreliable trap witnesses and lack of corroboration.

The appellant, Shivananda Bankolli, was the Deputy Commissioner of Excise at Mysore. He was convicted by the Principal Sessions Judge & Special Judge,...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Acquits Accused in Bribery Case Due to Inconsistent Evidence 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, Deorao Marotrao Bhagatkar, was the Principal of Kendriya Vidyalaya, Chandrapur. He was convicted by the Special Judge, Chandrapur, in S...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Acquits Appellant in Corruption Case Due to Lack of Proof of Demand and Acceptance. Conviction under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 Set Aside as Prosecution Failed to Prove Demand and Acceptance Beyond Reasonable Doubt.

The appellant, Shashikant Piraji Sonawane, was convicted by the Special Judge for Greater Bombay under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Co...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Gujarat High Court Acquits Accused in Corruption Case Due to Lack of Demand and Acceptance of Bribe. Conviction under Sections 7, 12, 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 set aside as prosecution failed to prove demand and acceptance beyond reasonable doubt.

The case involves two appeals filed by the original accused against their conviction under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The appellants were...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Gujarat High Court Dismisses State Appeal Against Acquittal in Corruption Case Due to Lack of Credible Evidence. Demand and Acceptance of Bribe Not Proved Under Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

The State of Gujarat filed an appeal under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the judgment and order of acquittal dated 04.03...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Gujarat High Court Dismisses State Appeal Against Acquittal in Corruption Case — Acquittal Upheld Due to Unreliable Trap Evidence and Invalid Sanction. Demand and Acceptance of Bribe Not Proved Beyond Reasonable Doubt Under Sections 7, 13(1)(d) and 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

Gujarat High Court Upholds Acquittal in Corruption Case Due to Lack of Credible Evidence and Procedural Lapses. Demand and Acceptance of Bribe Not Proved Beyond Reasonable Doubt Under Sections 7, 13(1)(d)(1)(2)(3) and 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

High Court of Karnataka Acquits Accused in Corruption Case Due to Lack of Credible Evidence and Uncorroborated Trap Proceedings. Demand and Acceptance of Bribe Not Proved Beyond Reasonable Doubt Under Sections 7, 13(1)(d) r/w 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

The appellant, M.C. Manjunatha, was convicted by the Principal Sessions Judge and Special Judge, Mysore, in Special Case No. 69/2004 for offences puni...

© 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...