Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
RANJAN GOGOI, CJI., R. BANUMATHI, J.
State Of Gujarat - Appellant
Versus
Navinbhai Chandrakant Joshi - Respondent
Miscellaneous Application No. 2597 of 2018 In Criminal Appeal No. 895 of 2018 (@ Criminal Appeal Nos. 895-896/2018)
Decided on : 07-12-2018
Prevention of Corruption Act - Modification of Conviction - Bribe Amount
Fact of the Case:
The accused filed a petition to modify the judgment, stating that he was not a government servant but bribe amount was recovered from him.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that although the accused was not a government servant, the recovery of currency notes established the ingredients of Section 8 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The conviction under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read with 13(2) of the Act was modified to the conviction under Section 8, and the sentence was reduced to six months.
Issues: Accused's status as a government servant, recovery of bribe amount, and application of relevant sections of the Prevention of Corruption Act.
Ratio Decidendi: The recovery of currency notes from the accused established the ingredients of Section 8 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, leading to the modification of the conviction and reduction of the sentence.
Final Decision: The court modified the conviction and reduced the sentence of the accused based on the recovery of bribe amount.
ORDER :
1. This is a petition filed by the accused no. 2/respondent no. 1 to modify the judgment dated 17.7.2018 in Criminal Appeal Nos. 895-896/2018. In paragraph (3) of the judgment, the accused no. 2/respondent no. 1 has been stated to be the Government servant, which is not factually correct. Though, the accused no. 2/respondent no. 1 is not a Government servant, bribe amount in currency notes of Rs.500/-were recovered from him only; there were signs of anthracene powder noticed from the shirt pocket of the accused no. 2/respondent no. 1. Considering the fact that currency notes were recovered form the accused no. 2/respondent no. 1, in our view, the ingredients of Section 8 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 are established. The conviction of the accused no. 2/respondent no. 1 under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read with 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 is modified as the conviction under Section 8 of the said Act, and the sentence of one year imposed is reduced to six months.
2. The judgment shall be modified accordingly.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
