BIBEK CHAUDHURI
Sujit Kumar Pandey – Appellant
Versus
C. B. I. – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Bibek Chaudhuri, J. - These two appeals are by two accused persons who stood trial in Special Case No.2 of 2004 initiated by the Central Bureau of Investigation, CBI for short. The appellant No.1 stand convicted and sentenced for committing offence found to be punishable under Section 7 and under Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption act and the appellant No.2 stand convicted and sentenced for committing offence punishable under Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code with Sections 7 and 13(2) with 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption act, hereinafter described as the said act.
2. Charges were framed against appellant No.1 Sujit Kumar Pandey commission of offence punishable under Section 120B of the IPC, secondly, Section 7 of the said act. Thirdly, Section 13(1)(d) of the said act and fourthly, under Section 12 of the said act. The appellant in CRa 12 of 2015 was charged under two heads, viz., Section 7 of the said act and Section 120B of the IPC. The court below found that the charge against the appellant was established and on such basis they were found guilty of having committed offences punishable under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) of the
B. Jayaraj vs. State of Andhra Pradesh
C. Sukumaran vs. State of Kerala
Dashrath Singh Chauhan vs. Central Bureau of Investigation (2019) 17 SCC 509
Mukhtiar Singh vs. State of Punjab
N. Sunkanna vs. State of Andhra Pradesh
N. Vijayakumar vs. State of Tamil Nadu (2021) 3 SCC 687
Panalal Damodar Rathi vs. State of Maharashtra AIR 1979 SC 1191
Prabhat Kumar Gupta vs. State of Jharkhand & Anr
Rajiv Kumar vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr. (2017) 8 SCC 791
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.