Search Results for "Illegal Gratification"

335 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 335 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Dismisses State's Appeal Against Acquittal of Central Excise Officers in Bribery Case. Demand and Acceptance of Bribe Not Proved Beyond Reasonable Doubt Under Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

The present appeals arise from an order dated 27.05.2019 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench, which allowed the appeals...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Dismisses Revision and Quash Petitions in Corruption Case Against RTO Officials. Prima Facie Case Exists Under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) r/w 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 Based on Trap and Recovery of Bribe.

The judgment pertains to two connected petitions arising from Special Case No.35/2015 pending before the Principal District and Sessions Judge and Spe...

© 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

Karnataka High Court Acquits Police Officers in Corruption Case Due to Unreliable Trap Witness and Lack of Corroboration. Conviction under Sections 7, 13(1)(d) and 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 set aside as sole trap witness was interested and independent witnesses turned hostile.

The case involves two appeals by accused police officers (Ramaiah, Police Head Constable, and T.R. Hanumanthaiah, Police Sub-Inspector) against their ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Acquits Talathi 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(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

The appellant, Dattatraya Laxman Bagdi, a Talathi working at Dundage, was convicted by the Special Judge, Gadhinglaj, for offences under Sections 7 an...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Acquits Police Head Constable 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, Baliram s/o Mansingh Chawhan, a Police Head Constable, was convicted by the Special Judge, Washim in Special Case No. 3/1998 for offenc...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Acquits Police Sub-Inspector and Private Individual in Corruption Case Due to Unreliable Trap Witness. Conviction under Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 set aside as sole trap witness was a stock witness and evidence lacked corroboration.

The appellants, Jawansingh Ramsingh Gaud (a Sub-Inspector of Police) and Umesh Manohar Ambre (a private individual), were convicted by the Special Jud...

© 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, Jaysing Nayrana Bidgar, was convicted by the Special Judge, Pune, for offences under Sections 7 and 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of the Pre...

© 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) 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, Jitendra Kumar Jain, was convicted by the Special Judge, Silvassa, for offences under Sections 7 and 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of the Pr...