Search Results for "acceptance of bribe"

57 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 57 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court 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, Shailendra Manikrao Bakare, was convicted by the Special Judge, Pune, for offences under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses State Appeal Against Acquittal of Doctor in Bribery Case. Prosecution Failed to Prove Demand and Acceptance of Bribe Beyond Reasonable Doubt Under Sections 7, 13(1)(d) and 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

The State of Maharashtra appealed against the judgment dated 31st January 2012 of the Special Judge, Pune, acquitting Dr. Anil Kacharu Shinde, a medic...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Acquits Police Inspector in Corruption Case Due to Unreliable Complainant and Lack of Corroboration. Conviction under Sections 7 and 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 set aside as demand and acceptance of bribe not proved beyond reasonable doubt.

The appellant, Sopan s/o Kadu Choudhari, a Police Inspector, was convicted by the Special Judge, Gadchiroli for offences under Sections 7 and 13(2) of...

© 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 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, 13(1)(d) r/w 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

The appellant, Chandrakant Nivrutti Pagar, a Talathi, was convicted by the Special Judge (Anti Corruption), Nashik for offences under Sections 7, 13(1...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Acquits Accused in Corruption Case Due to Unreliable Trap Witnesses and Lack of Proof of Demand. 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, Smt. Shobha Sonba Raut, was serving as Sub-Divisional Officer and Land Acquisition Officer at Osmanabad. The complainant, Dattatraya Ar...

© 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, Manohar Sahadev Parab, a Talathi, was convicted by the Special Judge, Ichalkaranji, under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read with 13(2) of th...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Acquits Police Head Constable in Corruption Case Due to Unreliable Complainant and Lack of Corroboration. 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 present appeal was filed by original accused No.1, Rafiq Beg Mirza, challenging his conviction by the learned Special Judge, Jalgaon, in Special C...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court 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) read with 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

The appellant, Uttam s/o Ganpat Ajgekar, was convicted by the Special Judge, Anti Corruption Bureau, Greater Bombay, vide judgment dated 4th February ...