C.PRAVEEN KUMAR
Shamshad Basha, S/o. Y. Nabirasool – Appellant
Versus
State Of A. P. , ACB, Kurnool Range, Rep. By SPL. P. P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Originally, the Accused Nos.1 and 2 in Calendar Case No.19 of 2001 on the file of Additional Special Judge for SPE & ACB Cases, Hyderabad were tried for the offences punishable under Section 7 and Section 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 [for short, “P.C.Act”].
2. Vide Judgment, dated 17.05.2006, the learned Additional Special Judge for SPE & ACB Cases, City Civil Court at Hyderabad while acquitting Accused No.1, convicted Accused No.2 under both the counts and sentenced him to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/- in default to undergo Simple Imprisonment for a period of three months for the offence under each of the counts. The substantive sentences were directed run concurrently.
3. The gravamen of the charge against the accused is that on 26.01.1999 Accused No.1 while working as Mandal Revenue Officer, Rudravaram Mandal and Accused No.2 as Mandal Deputy Surveyor, Rudravaram Mandal, demanded a sum of Rs.1000/- each as illegal gratification other than legal remuneration from Owk Chennaih and others, for doing an official favour, namely providing Ac.2.00 cents of land to Smt. Lachamma and
B. Jayaraj vs. State of Andhra Pradesh
C.M. Sharma v. State of A.P. [MANU/SC/0981/2010 : (2010) 15 SCC 1 : (2013) 2 SCC (Cri) 89]
CM. Girish Babu v. CBI [MANU/SC/0274/2009 : (2009) 3 SCC 779 : (2009) 2 SCC (Cri) 1]
M. Narsingarao vs. State of A.P. [2001(1) SCC 691]
P. Satyanarayana Murthy v. District Inspector of Police and Anr
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.