Global Lawyers Debate AI Liability in Autonomous Vehicles
03 Mar 2026
CCPA Fines Startup ₹8 Lakh for False Child Growth Claims
05 Mar 2026
Madras High Court Scoffs at Police Custody Injury Claim
05 Mar 2026
India's Criminal Investigations Face Systemic Conviction Crisis
05 Mar 2026
Kerala HC Slams TDB Financial Discipline in Ayyappa Conclave, Orders Auditor Report on Past Anomalies: High Court of Kerala
06 Mar 2026
ST Members Can Invoke Section 13B HMA If Hinduised By Customs: Chhattisgarh High Court
06 Mar 2026
Lease Cancellation Valid Even by 'In-Charge' Mining Officer Under OMMC Rules: Orissa High Court
06 Mar 2026
Ignoring Court-Mandated PWD Safety Report Invalidates Municipal Order: J&K&L High Court
06 Mar 2026
Kerala HC Reserves Verdict in Raju Tampering Conviction Plea
06 Mar 2026
Back
Next 
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
SANJAY A.DESHMUKH
Sharad S/o Manga Tayade – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J.
1. This appeal is preferred by the convicted accused against the judgment dated 8th January, 2018, passed by the learned Special Judge (ACB), Nanded in Special (ACB) Case No.7 of 2015, by which the appellant was convicted under Section 235(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short “the Cr.P.C.”) for the offence punishable under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (for short “the PC Act”) and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/-. In default, to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for two months. The appellant was further convicted for the offence punishable under Section 13(1)d) read with Section 13(2) of the PC Act and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs.3,000/-. In default, to suffer further rigorous imprisonment of three months. Both the sentences were directed to be run concurrently.
2. Brief facts of the prosecution case are that Grampanchayat, Umri Jahagir, District Nanded, reso
Proof of demand and acceptance of illegal gratification is essential for conviction under the Prevention of Corruption Act; failure to prove these elements results in acquittal.
The demand and acceptance of illegal gratification must be proven for conviction under the Prevention of Corruption Act, and the evidence of the complainant should be corroborated in material particu....
Proof of demand and acceptance is essential for conviction under the Prevention of Corruption Act; mere recovery without evidence of bribe demand is insufficient.
The essential elements of demand and acceptance of illegal gratification must be proven beyond reasonable doubt for conviction under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
The main legal point established is that demand of bribe is essential to establish guilt under the Prevention of Corruption Act, and mere recovery of money without proof of demand is insufficient for....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement to prove the demand and acceptance of bribe for offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act, and the importance of a valid sanc....
The court confirmed that the prosecution must prove demand and acceptance of bribes for corruption convictions, affirming that minor discrepancies in witness accounts do not undermine overall testimo....
The prosecution must prove demand and acceptance of bribe beyond reasonable doubt for convictions under corruption laws; mere recovery of money is insufficient.
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
Listen Article