Back
A. V. RAVINDRA BABU
Sankula Chandra Seker, S/o. S. Samba Siva Rao – Appellant
Versus
State Of A. P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Challenge in this Criminal Appeal is to the judgment, dated 25.06.2007, in Calender Case No.24 of 2004, on the file of the Court of Special Judge for SPE and ACB Cases, Vijayawada (for short, “the learned Special Judge”), where under the learned Special Judge found the Accused Officer (AO) guilty of the charges under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) R/w.13(2) of the Prevention of the Corruption Act, 1988 (for short, “the PC Act”), convicted him under Section 248(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, “the Cr.P.C”) and after questioning him about the quantum of sentence, sentenced him to undergo Simple Imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- in default to suffer Simple Imprisonment for three months for the charge under Section 7 of the PC Act and also to undergo Simple Imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/- in default to suffer Simple Imprisonment for six months for the offence under Section 13(1)(d) R/w.13(2) of the PC Act. Both the substantive sentences shall run concurrently.
2. The parties to this Criminal Appeal will hereinafter be referred to as described before the trial Court, for the sake of conven
The judgment established the importance of proving demand and acceptance of illegal gratification by a public servant to establish guilt under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) R/w.13(2) of the PC Act. It also....
Demand and acceptance of bribe by a public servant is a criminal misconduct within the meaning of Section 13(1)(d) R/w. Section 13(2) of the PC Act.
The prosecution can prove a valid sanction either by producing the original sanction, which contains the facts constituting the offence and the grounds of satisfaction or by adducing evidence alinude....
The court established that the accused, a public servant, demanded and accepted bribes, violating provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act, thus overturning the trial court's acquittal based on....
The demand for illegal gratification is essential to prove charges under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) R/w. Section 13(2) of the PC Act. Mere recovery of the tainted amount without proof of demand would no....
Demand and acceptance of bribe are essential ingredients of the offences under Sections 7 and 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Mere recovery of tainted amount in the abse....
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
