RAJENDRA M. SAREEN
State of Gujarat – Appellant
Versus
Amrutbhai Jivanlal Patel – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. This is an appeal preferred by the State of Gujarat under Section 378 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 against the judgment and order of acquittal dated 05.08.2005 recorded by the learned Special Judge, Surendranagar in Special (ACB) Case No.1 of 2002 whereby the learned Trial Judge acquitted the respondents-accused, of the charges for the offence punishable under Sections 7, 12, 13(1)(d) and 15 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (herein after referred to as “the Act”).
2. Brief facts of the case are that accused No.1 was ASI and accused No.2 was Police Constable at Sara Outpost Police Station, Dist; Surendranagar, at the relevant point of time. The complainant Shri Rupabhai Raval has alleged that a complaint was registered against his son named Laljibhai at Sara Outpost Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 323 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 183 and 184 of the Gujarat Panchayat Act. The said offence was investigated by respondent – accused No.1, wherein it is alleged that accused No.1 had gone to the residence of the Laljibhai to arrest him. Thereafter, in connection with such complaint against his son, complainant met the accused No.1
Arulvelu and another versus State
B. Jayaraj Vs./ State of Andhra Pradesh
Balak Ram v. State of U.P (1975) 3 SCC 219
Balbir Singh v. State of Punjab AIR 1957 SC 216
Bhagwan Singh v. State of M.P.
Bhaiyamiyan Alias Jardar Khan and Another vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Budh Singh v. State of U.P (2006) 9 SCC 731
Chaman Lal v. The State of Himachal Pradesh
Chandrappa v. State of Karnataka (2007) 4 SCC 415
Dhanapal v. State (2009) 10 SCC 401
Ghurey Lal v. State of U.P (2008) 10 SCC 450
K. Shanthamma Versus State Of Telangana
Kali Ram V. State of Himachal Pradesh
Khedu Mohton v. State of Bihar (1970) 2 SCC 450
M.G. Agarwal v. State of Maharashtra AIR 1963 SC 200
Narendra Singh v. State of M.P (2004) 10 SCC 699
Perla Somasekhara Reddy v. State of A.P (2009) 16 SCC 98
Rajesh Singh & Others vs. State of Uttar Pradesh
Ram Singh v. State of H.P (2010) 2 SCC 445
S. Rama Krishna v. S. Rami Reddy (2008) 5 SCC 535
Sambasivan v. State of Kerala (1998) 5 SCC 412
Shailendra Pratap v. State of U.P (2003) 1 SCC 761
Shambhoo Missir v. State of Bihar (1990) 4 SCC 17
Sheo Swarup v. King Emperor AIR 1934 PC 227
State of Goa v. Sanjay Thakran (2007) 3 SCC 755
State of Rajasthan v. Naresh (2009) 9 SCC 368
State of U.P. v. Banne (2009) 4 SCC 271
Point of law: So far as the presumption under Section 20 of the PC Act is concerned, it trite that even the presumption under Section 20 of the PC Act can be drawn only if an accused person has accep....
Point of law: So far as the presumption under Section 20 of the PC Act is concerned, it trite that even the presumption under Section 20 of the PC Act can be drawn only after demand for and acceptanc....
The main legal point established is that demand of bribe is essential to establish guilt under the Prevention of Corruption Act, and mere recovery of money without proof of demand is insufficient for....
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.