Back
NARENDRA KUMAR VYAS
Shesh Mani Mishra – Appellant
Versus
State of M. P. (Now C. G. ) through – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. This appeal has been preferred by the appellant under Section 374 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against judgment dated 30.06.1999 passed by Special Judge, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) in Special Criminal Case No. 49/91, whereby the appellant stands convicted and sentenced as under:-
| Conviction | Sentence |
| U/s 161 of IPC | R.I. for 1 year and fine of Rs. 1000/- and in default of payment of fine, additional S.I. for 3 months. |
| U/s 5(1)(D) r/w 5(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 | R.I. for 1 year and fine of Rs. 1000/- and in default of payment of fine, additional S.I. for 3 months. |
| (All the sentences to run concurrently) | |
2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 26.09.1986, the appellant, who was posted as an Assistant Security Inspector with the then Madhya Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (MPSRTC) Korba and a public servant. The complainant- Bholaram was posted as Conductor and carrying the bus at Balco-Korba bus route. The bus was checked near Madwarani Temple by the appellant along with another
Proof of demand and acceptance of illegal gratification is essential for conviction under the Prevention of Corruption Act.
The prosecution must prove both the demand and acceptance of illegal gratification to substantiate a conviction under the Prevention of Corruption Act; mere recovery of bribe money without proven dem....
The judgment establishes that the demand and acceptance of illegal gratification must be proven as a fact, and the prosecution can rely on direct or circumstantial evidence to establish guilt.
Evidence of demand and acceptance is crucial for conviction in corruption cases; mere recovery of money is insufficient without proof of illegal gratification.
Both demand and acceptance of illegal gratification are required for a conviction under the Prevention of Corruption Act; mere acceptance of bribe without proven demand fails to establish culpability....
Illegal gratification – Allegation of demand of gratification and acceptance made by a public servant has to be established beyond reasonable doubt – Mere possession or recovery of currency notes is ....
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
