Back
S. V. PINTO
State of Gujarat – Appellant
Versus
Devendrabhai Laxmanbhai Patel – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
S.V. PINTO, J.
1. This appeal has been filed by the appellant State under Section 378(1)(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the judgment and order of acquittal passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court No. 8, Bharuch (hereinafter referred to as “the learned Trial Court”) in Special ACB Case No. 7 of 2002 on 30.06.2005, whereby, the learned Trial Court has acquitted the appellant for the offence punishable under Sections 7, 13(1)(d) and 13 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereafter referred to as “the PC Act” for short).
The respondent is hereinafter referred to as the accused as he stood in original case for the sake of convenience, clarity and brevity.
2. The brief facts that emerge from the record of the case are as under:
The prosecution must prove the initial demand and acceptance of illegal gratification beyond reasonable doubt, and the burden of proof rests on the prosecution.
The prosecution must prove demand and acceptance of illegal gratification beyond reasonable doubt; mere recovery of tainted currency is insufficient for conviction.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the prosecution to prove demand and acceptance of illegal gratification beyond reasonable doubt, the presumption of innocence i....
The central legal point established is that the demand for illegal gratification is a sine qua non for convicting an accused under the Prevention of Corruption Act, and the prosecution must prove the....
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 demand for bribe money is essential to establish the offense under the Prevention of Corruption Act.
The judgment emphasizes the need to prove the demand and acceptance of illegal gratification beyond reasonable doubt, highlighting the requirement for direct or circumstantial evidence and the presum....
Proof of demand is essential in corruption cases under the Prevention of Corruption Act, and mere recovery of tainted currency notes without proof of demand is insufficient to establish an offence.
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
