A. V. RAVINDRA BABU
Arishapogu Nagarathnam @ Nagaraju, S/o. Papanna – Appellant
Versus
State of A. P. , Rep. by Inspector of Police – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
A.V.Ravindra Babu, J.
Challenge in this Criminal Appeal is to the judgment, dated 31.01.2011, in Calender Case No.28 of 2006, on the file of the Court of Special Judge for SPE and ACB Cases, Nellore (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(2) R/w. Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of the Corruption Act, 1988 (for short, ‘the PC Act’) and convicted him under Section 248(2) Cr.P.C. After questioning him about the quantum of sentence, the learned Special Judge sentenced him to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/- in default to undergo Simple Imprisonment for three months for the charge under Section 7 of the PC Act and also to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/- in default to undergo Simple Imprisonment for three months for the charge under Section 13(2) R/w. Section 13(1)(d) 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 convenience.
3.
Lalita Kumari v. Government of U.P. and others (2014) 2 SCC 1
Ganga Kumar Srivastava v. State of Bihar
Mohd. Iqbal Ahmed v. State of Andhra Pradesh (1979) 4 SCC 172
Neeraj Dutta v. State (Government of NCT of Delhi) (2022) SCC OnLine SC 1724
P. Sirajuddin v. State of Madras
The court affirmed that valid sanction and evidence of demand for bribe are essential for conviction under the Prevention of Corruption Act, with a presumption of guilt established when evidence supp....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the prosecution to prove the official favor pending with the accused and the demand for bribe beyond reasonable doubt.
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 and acceptance of a bribe by a public servant constitutes the essential ingredients of the offenses under Sections 7 and 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 ....
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.