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

2010 Supreme(Chh) 159

PRITINKER DIWAKER
Arun Kumar Pandey – Appellant
Versus
State of M. P. – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Pritinker Diwaker, J.

1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 16.1.1997 passed by Special Judge, Raipur, in Special Case No. 02/1992 convicting the accused/Appellant for the offences punishable under Sections 7 and 13 (1) (d) read with 13 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year with fine of Rs. 1000, in default of payment of fine to further undergo simple imprisonment for three months, on each count.

2. Case of the prosecution in brief is that at the relevant time the accused/Appellant was working as Labour Inspector posted at Bilaspur bus stand. His work was to check the illegal trafficking of labourers. It is alleged that on 15.1.1988, the accused/Appellant had demanded Rs. 500 from complainant Suresh Prasad Tiwari (PW-4) who at the relevant time was looking after the work of Pratap Travels. According to the case of the prosecution, as the complainant was not interested to give the amount of Rs. 500 to the accused/Appellant, he made a written complaint Ex. P-2 in the office of Dy. Superintendent of Police (Lokayukta) Bilaspur. his preliminary statement was recorded and after calling the







































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