Back
B. R. GAVAI, PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA
Shiv Kumar Sharma – Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
B.R. GAVAI, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. The appeal challenges the judgment and order dated 06.01.2017 passed by the learned Single Judge of the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan at Jaipur thereby dismissing the appeal filed by the appellant/accused, which was in turn filed thereby challenging the judgment and order dated 24.10.2013 passed by the learned Special Judge, Prevention of Corruption Act No. 1, Jaipur (hereinafter referred to as “the Special Judge”), convicting the appellant for the offences punishable under Section 13(1)(d)(ii) read with Section 15 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (‘PC Act’ for short) and under Section 477A of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (“IPC” for short) and sentencing him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year and a fine of Rs. 5000/- each for both the offences.
3. The Special Judge, vide order dated 03.06.2004, framed the following charges against the appellant:
“Firstly in the year 1994, on 25.04.1994 and around the same time, while working as public servant, you had conspired with the coaccused Bhagwan Sahai and in furtherance of that criminal conspiracy, you had received an advance of Rs. 15,000/- out of the approved amount of Rs.
For an offence punishable under Section 13(1)(d)(ii) read with Section 15 of PC Act, it is necessary to establish that a public servant has attempted to obtain for himself or for any other person any....
In criminal proceedings, mere inaccuracies in records do not establish intent to defraud unless there is compelling evidence of willful misconduct.
(1) It is not the law that where there is any infirmity or lacuna in prosecution case, same could be cured or supplied by a false defence or a plea which is not accepted by a Court. Supposition, surm....
Delayed justice is a form of denial of justice, and discipline, cooperation, and thorough preparation are necessary for timely disposal of criminal appeals. Additionally, no sanction is necessary for....
The prosecution must establish beyond a reasonable doubt the elements of cheating and conspiracy, including dishonest intent and the specific role of accused in the alleged fraud.
The High Court has the power to reverse the findings of acquittal by a trial court, but it will only do so if there are strong reasons based on evidence which can dislodge the findings arrived at by ....
(1) Appeal against acquittal – If view taken by trial court is a possible view, High Court cannot reverse acquittal to that of conviction.(2) Illegal gratification – Mere recovery of tainted money, d....
The judgment emphasizes the need for establishing criminal conspiracy beyond reasonable doubt and the requirement of dishonest intention for the offense of cheating under Section 420 IPC.
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
