Back
GURPAL SINGH AHLUWALIA
Gopal Shivhare – Appellant
Versus
State of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
JUDGMENT
This Criminal Appeal under Section 374 of Cr.P.C. has been filed against the Judgment and Sentence dated 18-7-2018 passed by Special Judge, S.P.E. (Lokayukt), Bhopal in Special Case No. SC LOK 26/2015, by which the appellant has been convicted and sentenced for the following offences:
| S. No. | Offence under Section | Sentence |
| 1. | 7 of Prevention of Corruption Act | R.I. for 1 year and fine of Rs.1,000/-. In default imprisonment of 3 months R.I. |
| 2. | 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) Prevention of Corruption Act | R.I. for 4 years and fine of Rs.1,000/-. In default imprisonment of 6 months R.I. |
All the sentences to run concurrently.
2. According to the prosecution case, the Appellant was working as Public Relation Officer, M.P. Tourism Department, Hotel Palash, Bhopal. The Appellant was presenting officer in a departmental enquiry, which was pending against the complainant Praveen Dubey, and co-accused T.R. Tank was the Enquiry Officer. The Appellant demanded an amount of Rs. 1 lac to drop the departmental enquiry from the complainant for himself as well as on behalf of co-accused T.R. Tank. The complainant Praveen made a complaint to the S.P.E. (
Illegal gratification – Order of sanction can also be proved by examining a witness who can identify signatures of sanctioning authority – Whether accused had competence or not cannot be an important....
The requirement of valid sanction for prosecuting public servants does not negate proceedings unless a failure of justice is demonstrated; demand and acceptance of bribes must be proven to establish ....
The demand of illegal gratification is essential for conviction under the Prevention of Corruption Act, and the prosecution must establish foundational facts and valid sanction for prosecution.
Conviction for corruption requires clear proof of bribery demand and acceptance; mere acceptance without evidence of demand is insufficient under the Prevention of Corruption Act.
Proof of demand and acceptance of illegal gratification is essential for conviction under the Prevention of Corruption Act; trivial amounts may not negate liability if corrupt intent is established.
Proof of demand and acceptance of bribes is essential for conviction under corruption laws, and procedural irregularities in sanction do not invalidate proceedings unless they cause failure of justic....
Proof of demand and acceptance of bribe is essential for conviction under the Prevention of Corruption Act; failure to establish these elements leads to acquittal.
Proof of demand and acceptance of illegal gratification is essential for establishing corruption charges under the Prevention of Corruption Act.
Once acceptance of the money is established, accused has to rebut said presumption by acceptable evidence. The explanation given by accused in this case regarding acceptance of amount and the evidenc....
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
