SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2000 Supreme(SC) 879

G.B.PATTANAIK, S.N.VARIAVA
State Of M. P. – Appellant
Versus
J. B. Singh – Respondent


ORDER

This appeal by the State of Madhya Pradesh is directed against an order of acquittal recorded by the High Court. The Respondent was charged under Section 161 IPC and Section 5(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act on the allegation that he made a demand for a sum of Rs. 270/- from one Mithailal and pursuant to the said demand, the money was paid which also was recovered from the rest room at the Police Station. The accused happens to be a Police Officer. The Special Judge convicted the accused Respondent of the charge under Section 5(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. But on appeal, the High Court has set aside the conviction and recorded an order of acquittal.

2. On examining the materials on record, the High Court came to the conclusion that the prosecution has failed to establish either the demand made by the accused or even the payment by the complainant and, therefore, the offence cannot be said to have been established beyond reasonable doubt. Mithailal, the complainant who was examined as PW-9 did not support the prosecution case during trial and, therefore, he was permitted to be cross-examined by the prosecution Counsel.

3. Mr. Shukla, learned senior Counsel







Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top