SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

A.N.DIKSHITA
Har Bharosey – Appellant
Versus
State of Uttar Pradesh – Respondent


JUDGMENT

A.N. Dikshita J. -This is an appeal by Har Bharosey Lal against the judgment and order dated 20-2-1979 passed by the Special Judge (II Addl. District and Sessions Judge) Budaun, convicting him under section 161 I.P.C. and section 5 (2) read with section 5 (1) (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and sentencing him to one year's R.I. on each count.

2. The prosecution story, in brief, is as follows:-At the relevant time the appellant was working as Head Clerk in the Sales Tax Office, Budaun. The complainant Mohd. Yusuf who had purchased some machines from Punjab needed Sales Tax Form No. 32 for transporting the machines to the State of U.P. According to the prosecution this form is issued free of costs by the Sales Tax Department. Mohd. Yusuf approached the appellant for issue of Form No. 32. The appellant demanded Rs. 25/- as bribe for issuing the form. Ultimately the appellant agreed to issue the form on payment of Rs. 10/- as illegal gratification.

Mohd. Yusuf made a complaint dated 12-8-1975, Ex. Ka-4, to the District Magistrate, Budaun, alleging that the appellant was demanding a bribe of Rs. 10/- for Form No. 32. Thereupon Sri Satya Pal Singh, Deputy Superintendent

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top