Search Results for "trap failure"

119 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 119 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Acquits Accused in Corruption Case Due to Lack of Independent Witnesses and Unreliable 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, G B Jagadeesh, was convicted by the Special Judge, Davanagere, in Spl.C.(Lokayukta) No.9/2007 for offences under Sections 7, 13(1)(d) r...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Gujarat High Court Acquits Accused in Corruption Case Due to Lack of Sanction and Unreliable Trap Witnesses. Conviction under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 set aside as prosecution failed to prove demand and acceptance of bribe beyond reasonable doubt.

The case pertains to two criminal appeals filed by the original accused against the judgment and order of conviction passed by the learned Additional ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Gujarat High Court Upholds Acquittal in Corruption Case Due to Lack of Corroboration and Unreliable Trap Witnesses. 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

Court Overturns Conviction Under Incorrect Section of Corruption Act. Appeal Allowed; Case Remanded for Correct Charges and Fresh Proceedings

The trial court convicted the accused under Section 8 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. However, the defense argued that Section 8 was incorr...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Gujarat High Court Acquits Accused in Corruption Case Due to Unreliable Trap Witness. Conviction under Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 set aside as sole interested witness's testimony lacked corroboration.

The appellant, Pravinbhai Ambalal Shah, was convicted by the learned Additional Sessions Judge & Special Judge, Kheda at Nadiad in Special Case No. 5 ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Acquits Accused in Corruption Case Due to Unreliable Complainant and Lack of Corroboration. Conviction under Sections 7, 13(1)(d) read with 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 set aside as demand and acceptance of bribe not proved beyond reasonable doubt.

The appellant, Sukhdeo Laxman Parale, was a Talathi (village revenue officer) in Phulumri, Yavatmal. He was convicted by the Special Judge, Pusad, for...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Gujarat 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 13(1)(d) and 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

The appellant, Dansinh Rupsinh Parmar, was convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Second Fast Track Court, Amreli in Special Case (ACB) No. 47/19...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Acquits Appellants in Corruption Case Due to Failed Trap and Lack of Demand Proof. Conviction under Section 7 of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 set aside as initial demand was not corroborated and trap failed.

The case involves an appeal against conviction under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The appellants, clerks at Pune Municipal Cor...