Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
M.I.ARUN
Poornima G, W/O Manjunath – Appellant
Versus
Karnataka Lokayuktha Police Tumkur Division Represented By Its Spp – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of the petition and factual background. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. argument against the prosecution based on previous judgment. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 3. response emphasizing the legality of the bribe acceptance. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 4. interpretation of section 7 regarding bribery offenses. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15) |
| 5. decision on the jurisdictional discretion of the court. (Para 16) |
| 6. final dismissal of the petition. (Para 17 , 18 , 19) |
ORDER :
M.I. ARUN, J.
1. The criminal petition is filed with the following prayers:-
"i. Set aside the entire proceedings in Spl.C.C.No.41/2021 pending on the file of learned 2nd Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Tumkur in respect of the offences punishable under Sections 7 (a) and 7A of the Prevention of Corruption (Amended) Act, 2018.
ii. Pass such other orders/directions as this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the circumstances of the case in the interest of justice and equity."
2. The second respondent - complainant was serving as a Range Forest Officer and he was charged with an offence under Section 338 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. After trial, he along with a few others, were acquitted.
3. The petitioner was posted as a Public Pr
The offense of bribery under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act is established through demand and acceptance, regardless of whether the work is completed or the interest of the bribe giver....
Proof of demand and acceptance of bribe is essential under the Prevention of Corruption Act; absence of such evidence warrants quashing of FIR.
Proof of demand and acceptance of bribes is essential for conviction under the Prevention of Corruption Act; mere recovery of money without evidence of demand does not establish an offence.
The prosecution must prove demand and acceptance of bribes beyond reasonable doubt, which was not established in this case.
The judgment establishes the principle that the demand and acceptance of illegal gratification are crucial for proving the offence under the Prevention of Corruption Act 1988, and the necessity of va....
Demand and acceptance of illegal gratification must be established beyond reasonable doubt to sustain charges under the Prevention of Corruption Act.
Charges under the Prevention of Corruption Act require a pending official duty and a clear demand for gratification, which were not present in this case.
Proof of demand for illegal gratification is essential to establish corruption charges under Sections 7 and 7A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, with mere return of money not sufficient without es....
Proof of demand and acceptance of illegal gratification is essential to establish corruption offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act.
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
