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

V.M.KANADE
Arjun Bajirao Kale – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Appellant:B.R. Patil, Advocate.
For the Respondent: D.P. Adsul, A.P.P.

JUDGMENT

Kanade V.M., J.—Head the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant and the learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State.

2. Appellant has filed this appeal, challenging the judgment and order passed by the Special Judge, Solapur dated 7/12/2006 whereby the learned Judge was pleased to convict the appellant for the offence punishable under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and sentenced him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay fine of Rs. 20,000/- and, in default of payment of fine, to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for one year and the learned Judge also convicted him for the offence punishable under Section 13 (1)(d) and 13 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and sentenced him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay fine of Rs. 30,000/- and, in default of payment of fine, to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for one and half years.

3. Prosecution case, in brief, is that the appellant was serving as a Senior Police Inspector in Vijapur Naka Police Station at Solapur. Prosecution case is that he demanded an amount of Rs. 50,000/- from the complainant by threatening to arrest him and his serv

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