Back
S. V. PINTO
Shantilal Madhurbhai Vasava – Appellant
Versus
State Of Gujarat – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. This appeal has been filed by the appellant – original accused under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Code’) against the judgment and order of conviction in Special (ACB) Case No. 54 of 1997 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, 3rd Fast Track Court, Surat (hereinafter referred to as ‘the learned Trial Court’) on 15.10.2007, whereby, the learned Trial Court has convicted the respondent for the offences punishable under Sections 7, 13(1)(d) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the P.C.Act’). That Special (ACB) No. 54 of 1997 was filed against the present appellant, who was the accused No.1 and accused Nos.2 and 3 were also charged along with the accused No.1 and by the impugned judgment and order, the learned Trial Court has convicted the present appellant – accused No.1 and has acquitted the accused Nos. 2 and 3 from the said offence and the appellant - accused No.1 and acquitted the co-accused are hereinafter referred to as ‘the accused’ as they stood in their rank and file in the original case for the sake of convenience, clarity and brevity.
2. The relevant facts leadin
Proof of demand and acceptance of illegal gratification beyond reasonable doubt is essential for conviction under the P.C.Act.
The prosecution must prove the demand and acceptance of illegal gratification beyond reasonable doubt to establish the guilt of the accused under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
Proof of demand and acceptance of illegal gratification is essential to establish guilt under the Prevention of Corruption Act, and without clear, cogent, and reliable evidence of demand, no convicti....
The prosecution must prove demand and acceptance as crucial elements for the offence under the Prevention of Corruption Act, and the requirement of valid sanction for prosecution is essential. Lack o....
The prosecution must prove the demand and acceptance of illegal gratification beyond reasonable doubt to establish the guilt of the accused under the Prevention of Corruption Act.
The prosecution must prove the demand and acceptance of illegal gratification beyond reasonable doubt to establish the guilt of the accused under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
The demand and recovery of illegal gratification must be proved beyond reasonable doubt to sustain a conviction under the Prevention of Corruption Act.
The prosecution must prove demand and acceptance of illegal gratification beyond reasonable doubt for a conviction under the Prevention of Corruption Act.
The demand for illegal gratification is essential for the offence under the Prevention of Corruption Act, and the prosecution must prove it beyond reasonable doubt.
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
