Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI BENCH
V.SRISHANANDA
Sharanappa, S/o. Veerbhadrappa Hugar – Appellant
Versus
State Through, Lokayukta Police Station, Kalaburagi, Through Addl. Spp, High Court Of Karnataka, Kalaburagi Bench – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(V. SRISHANANDA, J.)
Heard Sri Baburao Mangane, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri Subhash Mallapur, learned counsel for the respondent – Lokayukta.
2. Accused, who has been convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 7 , 13(1)(d) read with Section 13 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (for short ‘P.C.Act’) in Special Case No.13/2015 (Lokayukta) is the appellant.
3. Facts in nutshell for disposal of the appeal are as under: PW.1 – Sri Mallinath approached the Lokayukta Police, Kalaburagi contending that his wife, who was working as an Assistant Teacher in Government High Primary School at Kodalhangarga, accused was the Manager of Block Education Office. When the matter stood thus, from 30.10.2013 to 28.04.2014, wife of the complainant went on maternity leave. On 28.04.2014, complainant and his wife took permission from the BEO and resumed to her work on 29.04.2014. The salary of 180 days was withheld by the BEO and despite repeated request, not only the salary for 180 days was withheld but also subsequent salary was withheld. As such, complainant said to have approached the Secretary of Teachers’ Association by name Narasappa and all the three wen
Prosecution must establish both demand and acceptance of bribe to secure conviction under the Prevention of Corruption Act.
The court affirmed the importance of corroborative evidence in bribery cases, ruling that both demand and acceptance of bribes must be clearly established to support convictions under the Prevention ....
The sampling of circumstantial evidence and testimonial support is sufficient to uphold a conviction under the Prevention of Corruption Act, with indirect acceptance of bribes being legally tenable.
A conviction under the Prevention of Corruption Act requires clear evidence of demand and acceptance of bribes; mere recovery of tainted currency is insufficient without proof of the fundamental elem....
The necessity of proving both demand and acceptance of bribe as sine qua non for establishing offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act, along with the requirement for proper certification of e....
Proof of demand and acceptance of illegal gratification is essential for conviction under the Prevention of Corruption Act.
Illegal gratification – Section 20 of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 would come into operation only when there is no nexus between demand and action performed – But, when fact of receipt of payme....
Establishing demand and acceptance of bribe is essential for conviction under the Prevention of Corruption Act; failure to prove these elements results in acquittal.
Proof of demand and acceptance of bribe as a sine qua non for conviction under the Prevention of Corruption Act, emphasizing the necessity of corroborative evidence beyond the complainant's testimony....
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
