Back
S. V. PINTO
Ramsingbhai Abdabhai Vasava – Appellant
Versus
State of Gujarat – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
S.V. PINTO, J.
1. This appeal has been filed by the appellant under Section 374 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the judgment and order of conviction passed by the learned Special Judge, Fast Track Court No. 5, Bharuch, (hereinafter referred to as “the learned Trial Court”) in Special Corruption Case No. 6 of 1999 on 30.07.2005, whereby, the learned Trial Court has convicted the appellant for the offence punishable under Sections 7, 13(1) (d) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as “the PC Act”).
The appellant is hereinafter referred to as the accused as he stood in the 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 demand for bribe money is essential to establish the offense under the Prevention of Corruption Act.
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 demand for illegal gratification is essential for the offence under the Prevention of Corruption Act, and the prosecution must prove it beyond reasonable doubt.
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 the case against the accused beyond reasonable doubt, and the demand and acceptance of illegal gratification must be established for an offence under the Prevention of Corr....
The judgment emphasizes the importance of proving demand and acceptance of illegal gratification and the need for reliable and corroborative evidence in bribery cases.
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; mere suspicion is insufficient for conviction.
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
